Talk:Saint Patrick's Day/Archive 2

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search


More Info on Origins

The article is pointing to the wrong website for the NYC St Patrick's Day Parade. The actual URL for the official site is: MollyA102

I read or heard somewhere, that origin of the parades in the U.S. started with the British during the Revolutionary War, in order to get more men enlisted to their side. They were also the ones who introduced the non-Irish, but rather Scottish Bagpipes into the parade. I don't have any citations or references for this tidbit. But if this is true, it should clearly be included here. Since bagpipes seem to be a staple in the U.S. parades, also parties.

Interesting! I've always wondered about the bagpipe thing, since they are generally identified more with Scotland than with Ireland. I don't know if it's true either (in all honesty, it has a slight urban legend vibe), but it's certainly worth a mention if there's truth to it. MrBook 21:15, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

I'd love to know how St. Patrick's Day went from a religious holiday to a day of drinking and partying, because it's an odd transition.-RomeW 23:38, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

I hope you find time to read my entry on "paddywhackery" below!--PeadarMaguidhir 11:26, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

consumption of alcohol

Oh come on! Consumption of alcohol is not an offical way of celebrating St Patricks Day, I've lived in Dublin too long and seen the mess created there on St Patricks Day each year because of drunks, seriously it's a horrible sight and consumping of alcohol shouldn't be listed as a way to celebrate Paddy's Day. David PJ Webster 22:06, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

From what you say, a large number of people in Dublin, capital of Eire, for whom Patrick is the patron saint, celebrate the day of their patron saint through the consumption of alcohol! ;-)
I realise it may be disheartening if you prefer to focus on St Patrick himself and the religious/historical aspect, but it sounds like this is the way people celebrate it.
I live in England, and it's interesting that people "Celebrate" what is really an Irish event, but it really is just an excuse to get pi**ed. Few people here make the same effort over St George's Day (although it does seem to be making a comeback). However St George's Day is also celebrated by getting pi**ed and having a parade round here.

It is still not an offical way. Young children don't go out and get drunk on St Patrick's Day. People drink on Christmas regularly, but it is not the way in which it is celebrated. Many public holidays (in Ireland) are excuses to drink. To celebrate the actual Holiday wearing shamrocks, having green and going to the parade are the main activites. And for the religiously inclined, there is mass. Crakker (talk) 11:56, 24 January 2008 (UTC)


I archived old talk on 23:02, 15 March 2006 (UTC). --Neutralitytalk 23:02, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Needed Citations

Some of these "citation needed" marks could be removed, couldn't they? An example would be where it states what sort of festivities go on. That's sort of like "People give presents on Christmas. [Citation Needed]"

Last time I checked it was against Wiki policy to attack a page with "citation needed" as the vast majority of articles are undercited anyhow. That this page needs more citations is undoubtable......that it needs "citation needed" every two sentences is not. It currently looks ugly. Slizor 00:40, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
No, what's against Wiki policy is making unverifiable claims. If you think all the "citation needed" tags look ugly, the way to get rid of them is to verify the claims they make. Angr/talk 10:56, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
It's ridiculous, though, to have so many. I agree with Slizor. I'm ashamed that this article, which so many people will surely read today, currently stands as a monument to one of Wikipedia's most lamentably bureaucratic tendencies. Does every sentence of every article either need a citation or a "citation needed" these days? Frankly, I think a wiser policy would be to note where citations are needed on an article's talk page instead. Attentiveness to sources need not preclude aesthetics.
Furthermore, there is a difference between claims which are unverifiable and claims which are unsourced. That's something to think about too. --BDD 16:59, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
I agree that the number of citation flags is excessive. Also, a lot of information seems to be copy and pasted from here. I'm trying to figure out exactly what. This article really needs a lot of work. --Fang Aili 17:13, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

"Disputed edits can be removed immediately and placed on the talk page for discussion, or where the edit is harmless but you dispute it and feel a citation is appropriate, you can place [citation needed] after the relevant passage. This should be used sparingly; Wikipedia has a lot of undercited articles, and inserting many instances of [citation needed] is unlikely to be beneficial." Slizor 14:26, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

I added citation tags because the second half of the "History" section contains many general statements including statements begining with words such as "Of course...". The writing is not encyclopedic. Wikipedia has a great opportunity to take a topic like this and truly write in an encylopedic style which informs people and the article falls short in this way. I looked at the article for the first time today. While there is a fair amount on interesting information about the article it needs much editing to make it encyclopedic. Mfields1 21:16, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Northern and Southern Ireland did not exist at the time of the Battle of the Somme. These only came into existence under the Government of Ireland Act 1920.

Yes, Ireland was one country back then, which was part of the United Kingdom.
As to the drinking for hats, please delete citation: In the UK St Patrick's Day is purely a marketing opportunity for Guinness, and one of the marketing gimicks is that if you drink a certain number of pints of Guinness (4 in my local) you get a big foam hat. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk) 13:47, 17 March 2007 (UTC).

Happy St Patrick's Day

Happy St Patricks Day to all Wikipedians, especially to those who are Irish at heart.--File Éireann 01:12, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

And to you! I'm currently trying to enlighten my Swedish mates; most of them have never even heard of this day. --TheFinalFraek 09:19, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

(nearly) The entire English speaking world knows/celebrates Saint Patrick's day, how many people know of the Swedish national day (if you even have one) outside of Sweden itself? Billtheking 15:58, 16 March 2007 (UTC)


Should we have this page locked for the day? Seems it has been the victim of multiple acts of vandalism today. Cliph 15:04, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

I don't think it's necessary. It's nothing we can't keep on top of, and it's on the Main Page today, so protecting it should really be a last resort. Angr/talk 15:08, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

Did someone go into this page and change all the references of the color green to purple? Am I just crazy or is someone pulling an early April Fool's joke? -Rand (Austin, Tx) 3/17/2006 9:26 am Central Standard Time

Looks like it has been fixed. -Rand

The first section seems to have been tampered with. Everywhere it should read green it says purple, even in the picture captions. - Milena (3/17/2006) 4:42pm Central European Time

Good Day to visit the Irish Museum?

I came to look at the Saint Patrick's Day page and all I saw was a flag of a hammer and sickle on a red backround and the mentioned items in gold. I scrolled down to find "Wikipedia is Communism" I do hope all the pranks stop so people needing the page can use it. -angelRinny (Saint Clair Shores, MI) 3/17/2006 4:44pm Eastern Standard Time


St Patrick is the patron saint of the whole island of Ireland. Should we include a flag to represent Nortern Ireland? Dbnull 15:33, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

  • I don't see why the republic's flag is there in the first place - it has no intrinsic link to St Patrick's Day. I'm removing it. --Kwekubo 01:18, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
  • I restored the flag. It is very relevant to the concept of being "Irish for a day", wearing the colors of the flag, the fact that people wave Irish flags at parades, the association with the country, etc. Johntex\talk 01:26, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
  • For disambiguation purposes shall we at least start by changing the text underneath the tri-colour from 'The Irish Flag' to 'The Flag of the Republic of Ireland'? The current text is misleading and helps perpetuate a common misconception (especially in the USA) that the tri-colour represents the geographical island of Ireland. If flags are to be included then there should be flags that represent both geo-political regions of the island. Comments? Dbnull 02:47, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
  • I'm changing the text under the flag. Dbnull 14:30, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Thanks Dbnull - I think it is a good change. Johntex\talk 15:41, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

Wearing Orange

Is it true that Protestants are supposed to wear oranges —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Keeperoftheseal (talkcontribs) 16:39, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

For some people, green is associated with catholocism, and orange is associated with protestantism. (see Orange Institution). For some people, the colors are a political statement about whether Northern Ireland should stay part of the UK or become part of the Irish Republic. Some people choose to wear both orange and white, such as the colors of the Irish flag. For most American's at least, green is associated with being Irish (even if only for a day) and attending the Saint Patrick's Day festivals, and whether or not you get pinched at school, etc... Johntex\talk 00:29, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

The local paper came today, with lots of pictures of the St Patrick's Day Parade and crowds in the fairly big town a few miles away. And yes, there was plenty of orange around, if only in conjunction with green and white, eg some revellers had green wigs, white faces and orange beards. Interestingly, the predominantly Protestant crowds supporting Northern Ireland at football have no problems at all wearing green. The only sad thing is that they boo anyone who plays for Celtic. Bill Tegner 18:47, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

It may be of interest to some to know that Dubliners of the old stock considered the color green as unlucky, and refused to have green objects in their homes--PeadarMaguidhir 07:54, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

I grew up in Rhode Island (in the shadow of the Boston parade, as it were) and I was always told that, at least in Boston, wearing orange on St. Patty's Day would get you beat up. I also heard the Protestant vs Catholic thing mentioned above. I'm not sure how true it is, but I believe it enough to never wear orange on the 17th of March. 23:57, 10 March 2007 (UTC) Lauren, not a user. 4 March 2007

Odd, that. I mean the Irish flag is as orange as it is green. Mind you, I was once by chance in Belfast, Maine, on 12 July, and nothing happened. Quickest way to get beat up round here, any day, is to wear a Rangers shirt. But I'm sure that wouldn't mean much in Boston. Bill Tegner 22:39, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps something should be put in about the controversy surrounding St Patrick's Day in Northern Ireland? -- 13:59, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Changing our shade of green

The color green we have in our infobox, {#00DE00} certainly is green, but I don't think this color is what people would think of when they think of green and Saint Patrick's Day. I think they think of a color more like that of a shamrock, or like that of the green in the Irish Flag. I'm trying out a shade I think is better. Please let me know what you think. Johntex\talk 00:36, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

Infobox photo

do you think the infobox photo should be changed to something more appropriate? Like this one? Maybe someone could crop it so it shows his arms and head? 20 march 2006. Stpatrick.jpg

  • I don't think so. I think the new proposed image is better for Saint Patrick perhaps. The imsage we are already using is better for Saint Patrick's Day. Johntex\talk 15:27, 20 March 2006 (UTC)


Can someone add some pictures from the 2nd biggest parade, in Savannah! I live here, but don't know exactly how.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talkcontribs) 16:26, 2006 March 21 (UTC)

  • That would be great! On the left hand side of your window, below the search box, there is a link that says "Upload file" - if you click on that link, there are instructions about how to upload a photo, and how to place it in the image. If you run into any trouble, you can ask for help by posting to WP:HELP. Best, Johntex\talk 01:05, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
  • There isn't one picture of Dublin parades in this article! Does anyone have pictures to upload?
  • Here are two pictures I took from Montreal's Parade (2006)

Holy Week

If it falls in Holy Week, it is moved to the second Monday after Easter.

What?! I'm removing this sentence. If anyone wants to put it back in, can you please back this statement up? The earliest date under the Gregorian calender on which Easter Sunday can fall is March 22nd. This would put Paddy's Day on the Monday after Palm Sunday (which is a relatively unimportant day of Lent). I can't see why it would be moved. (Also, the last year this happened was 1818, the next will be 2225.) Dave 00:07, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

St Patrick Day Traditions

since when is getting a "guinness hat" a tradition - its simply a marketing gimmick that has been going about 4 years - hardly qualifies as a tradition

As someone who lives in Northern Ireland, I would ask that the flag of St.Patrick and the flag of Northern Ireland be included here as he is the patron saint of the people of the whole island and not just the Republic. The flags issue is extremely divisive in Northern Ireland at least, and people of either Protestant, Unionist, Loyalist or non-republicans find the flag of the Republic of Ireland and other republican symbols unrepresentative of them. This in turn excludes certain people who want to be included in the day of their patron saint.

Saint Patrick brought Christianity to Ireland not Republicanism and if only the Republican and Nationalist symbols and flags are shown and flown then it is no longer about the people of Ireland, St.Patrick or Christianity but all about Republicanism. It should be a festival that brings people together who either live in Ireland, North or South or anyone who has Irish ancestry or roots around the world. Inclusion not exclusion.

I agree with much of what you say, not least your last sentence, but as a Protestant who lives in the South, I am very conscious that the Irish tricolour is as Orange as it is Green. Millbanks 22:11, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

More Americans celebrating it

Seems more Americans who claim to have some Irish in them yet know nothing about the culture or the capital of Ireland are celebrating this day and claiming to have pride. Hel-lo, St. Patrick's meant two long Masses and no parades. Parades in Ireland started when the American tourists came and asked where they were. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk) 00:46, 22 December 2006 (UTC).

Stop talkin shite! Vintagekits 00:57, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Vintagekits, your rudeness is matched only by your ignorance. The above comments are quite correct. I can partly vouch from my own experience as a child in Ireland and would also draw your attention to the study, The Wearing of The Green, referenced above.--PeadarMaguidhir 09:32, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

What's happening now is that nearly all our political leaders are jetting out to all corners of the globe, leaving the Garda to contain the alcohol fuelled revelry. Nothing wrong with enjoying a few jars on this special day, but surely the main point is to celebrate the life of the man who brought Christianity here (even though he was a Brit!), and banished the snakes.Bill Tegner 09:33, 15 March 2007 (UTC)


What? No history of all of these traditions? Is there not a history to these tradtitions that's verifiable? McKay 06:53, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

I did make an input on this, but it might have been a bit uncomfortable to someone, because it was "doctored". I've restored it as far as I can, but the person who changed my wording might be interested in this extract from the 16 March "Church of Ireland Gazette" - "The Saint Patrick's Day we know was invented in America: the first public celebration was in Boston in 1737, and the first Saint Patrick's Day Parade was held in New York on 17 March 1762 - by Irish soldiers in the British army. The first Saint Patrick's Day in Dublin was not staged until 1931". If anyone wants to challenge this, let me know, and I can give them Church of Ireland Gazette contact details. Bill Tegner 16:40, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

While agreeing with Bill, I must again draw your attention to the book, The Wearing of the Green, referenced above.--PeadarMaguidhir 09:41, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

UK Celebrations

The Largest parade in the uk is actually in Birmingham and not Manchester.

In fact on researching this further I found the following article on which is appears almost identical apart from this wiki replaces Birmingham with Manchester. as follows

"The largest Saint Patrick's Day parade in the UK is held in Birmingham and consists of a two mile route through the city centre. The organisers of the parade describe it as the third biggest parade in the world after Dublin and New York. Other Saint Patricks Day parades take place around the country including in London where the largest minority community is Irish. The Lanarkshire town of Coatbridge where the majority of the towns population are of Irish descent also has a day of celebration and parades in the town centre."

Well over 100,000 people usually attend the event 10:12, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Real age, birth date, death date

Does anyone have a source for the real birth and death years of St. Patrick? He most assuredly did not live 120 years. The article currently states 373-493 for birth-death. The "New Advent" Catholic encyclopedia ( states:

Apostle of Ireland, born at Kilpatrick, near Dumbarton, in Scotland, in the year 387; died at Saul, Downpatrick, Ireland, 17 March, 493.

There's an attached note that states:

Other sources say 460 or 461 —Ed.

I don't believe 387-493, either. People just didn't live to be 100 or more years old back then. James A. Stewart 05:39, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Most online sources seem to refer to 461 as the year of death. I'd prefer to find an academic source to cite before changing it. If anyone finds one I'd suggest changing both this and the Saint Patrick article, which also quotes 493 with only one dubious historical text as the source. James A. Stewart 05:45, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Sold into slavery

"At the age of 16, he was sold into slavery by a group of Irish marauders that raided his village."

That sentence is in the history section. The group that captured him was actually a raiding party containing Niall of the Nine Hostages, who was the High King of Ireland at the time. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk) 13:55, 17 March 2007 (UTC). and he got all the rats out of irland

Artistic Celebrations section and Celebrations in the US

I'm not sure what the point of this one is. It doesn't seem very relevant, it's not well-titled, and it reads an entire menu for little reason whatsoever. Also, the part in Celebrations in the US about the Ancient order of the Hiberians and the two paragraphs about gay marchers seem really random and should either be edited down and streamlined. Considering the Hiberians section is unsourced, it seem that that should probably be omitted altogether. Wtstar 15:29, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

The role of the Ancient Order of Hibernians is admirably documented in the book, The Wearing of The Green, references above. Presumably, records also exist of the court cases arising out of this controversy.--PeadarMaguidhir 19:20, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

SP userbox

Where can I get the userbox that says "This user wishes you a happy St. Patrick's Day"? ~ UBeR 19:26, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Copyrighted text

A previous comment noted that a number of lines appeared to be from another source. While I have not perused that possibility, I did stumble across a definite block that is almost entirely taken from one of the external links in the article. There are no citations, nor any reference to permission obtained.

E.g., under History, the text beginning with "Patrick was quite successful at winning converts..." is nearly verbatim from the second External Link: Saint Patrick History.

I am not an experienced user so am simply pointing this out for someone more familiar with the process to make the appropriate modifications, or to contact the author regarding his Permission to Reprint rules (which it clearly violates at this time).

Wickertu 01:15, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

It looks like this was removed on Apr 7 2007. I'm not sure if the person removing this text noticed your comment, but thanks for the catch anyway! Ischorr 04:18, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Where is the largest parade

At the time of me writing this, the main article says that the New York parade is the largest outside Ireland. I believe this is an assumption, I've always believed for years that the New York parade is the largest in the world, much bigger than the parade in Dublin (which in turn is the largest in Ireland). There's a link here that seems to confirm that fact. "The New York celebration is the oldest and largest St. Patrick's Day Parade in the world. The parade dates back to 1762, and in 2003 more than 150,000 marchers ...". However this other link also talks about the 2003 being the largest. I was wondering if perhaps the New York parade had only being the largest in the year of 2003. I couldn't find any other references to the sizes of parades in Ireland. For example Boston is also a huge parade, I think, maybe bigger than anything in Ireland. So I didn't want to just change the main page. There must be somewhere the sizes of parades are listed. As St. Patrick's day has just passed, maybe the numbers in the Boston, New York and Dublin parades will be listed soon, and then this could be put in the main page? 03:55, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

St Patrick's Day 2007

This must go down as a Great Day for the Irish. OK, beating Italy at rugby might have been expected. But beating Pakistan at cricket in the World Cup in Jamaica! A great day indeed! Bill Tegner 09:11, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, a sad postscript. The coach of the Pakistan team, Englishman Bob Woomer, died of a heart attack shortly after the match. As today's Irish Times says, "Cricket joy short-lived". Bill Tegner 15:04, 19 March 2007 (UTC)


grenne yur —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 19:00, 19 October 2007 (UTC)


I removed 3 countries where Saint Patricks day is supposedly celebrated because: A EVERYTHING in it was uncited B The Singapore section actually centered around linkspam C The Uruguay one is pathetic, it looks like it was written by a child. D The same goes up for the Argentina section. E NOWHERE does it state HOW many people supposedly celebrate S P day in those countries

Regards Hereitisthen (talk) 11:55, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

I put back Argentina´s section, quoting some sources. I barely changed the original, I don´t think it was written by a child. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pmgram (talkcontribs) 19:18, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

'Roman festival of the Bacchanalia'

Is this really relevant/likely considering that the Romans never invaded Ireland and the alchoholic nature of the festival surely has more to do with the nature of 19th C Irish society? —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 05:47, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Is this really relevant? Agreed, the Romans didn't ever invade Ireland; but that has nothing to do with the fact that the Irish raided the West Coast of Britain (including other places) for slaves and such available evidence as we have suggests that Patrick (see above) was a Romano-Briton.

Indeed, this piece borders on a racial slur!--PeadarMaguidhir (talk) 13:59, 23 January 2008 (UTC)


Any chance we could get a decent photo from Ireland to go in the infobox? It seems somehow wrong to have a photo from the USA at the top of the article. Stifle (talk) 19:00, 5 January 2008 (UTC)


Can someone please adress the whole pinching thing. I really hate getting pinched on St. Patricks day when I forget to wear green and I'd liked to know how it started.--The_stuart 17:30, 17 March 2006 (UTC) I've been looking this up. There's several answers on Yahoo, at this link Except I don't think they're right. I found a closed answer at "Answers.Yahoo" where it said it was originally an American game. People would wear a coat and you would pinch them if you thought they weren't wearing green underneath. If they were wearing green they could pinch you back 10 times. I asked my American freind, and she says this sounds familiar, that in America if you thought someone wasn't wearing green and you pinched them, they could pinch you back several times. There's also a link here which is suggesting a political origin for this practice, starting from when the English occupied Ireland. Everything I've seen on the web suggests this is an American practice only, except here where on this British Council website it says that Irish children do this. I don't feel confident enough to edit the main page, but the 'game' story seems plausible. Can anyone find a reputable link to use to change the page? 03:41, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Just to add to what I said, I found this link, where it says; "Another tradition associated with St. Patrick ’s Day, especially in America is wearing green to avoid being pinched. It is unclear as to the exact origins of this tradition, but legend has it that in early America, Irish Immigrants and those of Irish Decent wore green in honor of the Emerald Isle." Like all of these things, I bet it's impossible to (A) say it's ONLY and American tradition, as I'm sure SOME other's do it, and (B) determine EXACTLY where the tradition originated. I suspect the best that could be done is to say something like 'It is unclear where the exact origins ..." and then maybe give citations to any particular explanation that is been given (like the link saying it had political origins). Sorry I wasn't able to change the main page myself, but maybe this discussion will help someone else decide on the right change? 04:17, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

I've never ever seen this tradition in ireland, in fact many consider wearing green to be unlucky. (talk) 18:10, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

New York City Parade

In the section that talks about the NYC parade, the following statement is incorrect:

    It is the only New York City parade in which the marchers head uptown instead of downtown. 

Ticker-tape parades, such as the one just held for the Superbowl Champion New York Giants (I love typing/saying that), also travel uptown.

Happy St. Patty's day to all!!

MRC - 2/27/08 —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 23:50, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

5 day festival?

"The St. Patrick's Day parade in Dublin, Ireland is part of a five-day festival;"

I've never heard or seen anything about this. St.Patricks day is just one day here in Dublin. (talk) 18:13, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Date for 2008 celebrations inconsistent across nations and societies

A brief Googlesearch for the date of St. Patrick's day celebrations for 2008 reveals that only the roman catholic church has shifted it to March 15th, while there are parades in Montserrat on March 17th and in Japan on March 16th. It would be helpful to expand the Date secion in the inlet on the right-hand side in order to reflect the few exceptions and claify the situation. cheers, docpi (talk) 13:01, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

It was actually moved to the 14th, not the 15th. Saint Joseph's is a solemnity worldwide. Saint Patrick's is a solemnity in Ireland and Australia amongst others, but his rank is certainly not the same. With Saint Joseph's transferred to the 15th, Saint Patrick's Day is moved back again to the 14th. It was celebrated in Australia yesterday. (talk) 12:21, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

infinite semi-protection?

isn't that a bit extreme? Can't we put it at 2 weeks? Kingturtle (talk) 19:04, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Butte Beats Syracuse

Where it states that Syracuse is the largest Saint Patrick's celebration in the United States, per capita, I feel that is in error. While Syracuse may boast a large celebration, it is Butte, Montana which can honestly say it has the biggest per capita celebration. Aside from the actual date of March 17th, the town celebrates for the entire month of March. Many cities in Montana offer shuttles to Butte to partake in the massive festivities, and there is hardly a soul in the city that isn't out in celebration that day. There may be more actual people at Syracuse, however, per capita, Butte's celebration has long stood as the largest. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 13:06, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Can you cite that? tyx (talk) 19:52, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

A British Celebration

Is Saint Patricks Day just as much a British celebration as an Irish one? I believe so because: 1) Ireland is part of the British Isles 2) Northern Ireland is part of the United Kingdom 3) Saint Patrick came from England and settled in Northern Ireland, he was British or at least Irish/English within a British context 4) Saint Patricks Flag forms part of the United Kingdom flag 5) It is widely celebrated throughout the British Isles including the United Kingdom I'm sure there's other reasons as well. But I believe it is just as much a British celebration as an Irish one! YourPTR! 15:10, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

St Patrick was Romano British. No way was he "English". At the time of his birth, England and the English did not exist. Bill Tegner 09:27, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

"1) Ireland is part of the British Isles" That's a matter of perspective. [It's not a matter of perspective at all - Britush Isles refers to a geographical region, of which the land mass known as Ireland is a part - try to think beyond dunderheaded naive politicising when approaching this subject please]
"3) Saint Patrick came from England and settled in Northern Ireland, he was British or at least Irish/English within a British context"

The British never invaded Wales. The English did. The English also invaded Britain. The British were the original people there. Really, you should know this, surely? Millbanks 22:01, 3 April 2007 (UTC) [Again, wrong - the Anglo Saxons are not the English - they make up a tiny part of the genetic history of the British Isles (see above) and "the English" are a mixture of Celt and Anglo Saxon to pretty much the same degree as the Scots or Irish - but hey, given this is a subject about Ireland, facts do tend to go out the window in favour of Americanised genetic myth!]

Irish people do not see Ireland as part of the British Isles. There's a clue in the UK's full name: "United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland". Calling this archipelago the British Isles would be like calling the Caribbean "the Cuban Isles", just because Cuba is the largest. Also, "St Patrick's flag" has nothing to do with him; it's a 16th c. Fitzgerald symbol. EamonnPKeane (talk) 21:40, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
What the Irish my or may not regard as the British Isles does not change the fact that this is the correct geographical name. The Carribean is not the name of an archipelago, but the sea. TINYMARK 21:53, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

I suspect that that's a question of archaic geography rather than an implied political statement. For what it's worth, the North Sea used to be referred to as the German Ocean. Bill Tegner 08:11, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

It's actually celebrated anywhere with many Catholics or others who venerate Patrick on March 17. It's celebrated especially enthusiastically in Ireland, both the Republic and Northern Ireland, because he's the patron saint of Ireland (and yes, he was a Romano-Briton). Additionally, it's celebrated enthusiastically in the US and Canada, because of the large amount of Irish immigrants to those countries. If the holiday is celebrated in Great Britain, I'd imagine it has more to do with their historic connections with Ireland and the amount of Irish immigration there, than it does with Patrick having been from Britain.--Cúchullain t/c 20:39, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
Over here (England) the only reason it's 'celebrated' is as an excuse for everyone to get hammered. 20:58, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Why not get hammered on St George's Day instead? You have your own saint, don't you?Bill Tegner 13:05, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Banishing snakes might seem a strange occupation for a saint (actually, the snakes never made it to Ireland at the end of the last Ice Age); however, Saint George's claim to fame--killing a dragon--strikes me as a peculiar road to sanctity.--PeadarMaguidhir 09:37, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Why do people get drunk at all on St.Patricks day?Its nothing to do with St.Patrick.

Is st. Patricks day offensive to any religon?

Well, the way it is now being celebrated is causing offence to many Christians in Ireland. Bill Tegner 08:11, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

The way it is now celebrated is causing offense to many Christians and non-Christians of Irish descent in the US as well. I have lived here all my life and have not worn green or orange on St Patrick's Day since I turned 15, yet every year I must explain that it's a quiet personal protest and that some of us don't think costumes of Leprechauns wearing boxing gloves carrying kegs on their backs are funny. No one would dare do a similar thing on Chinese New Year (nor should they). My Mexican friends fear the growing popularity of Cinco de Mayo may turn it into an "Everyone-is-Mexican-today-so-let's-all-get-drunk-and-go-to-Taco-Bell" holiday. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 03:55, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Saint Patrick has no more to do with getting drunk than Saint Valentine has to do with young lovers.PeadarMaguidhir 07:43, 18 April 2007 (UTC)


I changed the birthplace entry from Wales to Roman Britain for two reasons. First, it ties in with the main article on St. Patrick. Second, Wales did not exist when Patrick was born. Neither did England. They were both part of the Roman Britannia. In case anyone's unhappy, please note that in any event, the Irish (Gaelic) for Wales is "an Bhreatain". —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Bill Tegner (talkcontribs) 19:34, 15 March 2007 (UTC).

The Irish for Wales is An Bhreatain Bheag, "Lesser Britain". He was born in Banna Venta Berniae, which scholars believe to have been near either Carlisle or Birdoswald, both of which are in modern England. EamonnPKeane (talk) 21:34, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

You cant say with certainty that he was born in Britain. There is also the possibility that he was born in Northern France/Normandy Billtheking 15:54, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. I re-checked the main Wikipedia article, and yes, there it says "Roman Britain" which I thought was generally accepted. I'll take advice from our Church of Ireland Rector tomorrow as to whether the word "probably" should be added. OK? Bill Tegner 17:15, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

I've just seen a note above, and it says near Dumbarton, Scotland! I'm not sure if the Romans ever got much of a hold that far north, and in any event they'd have withdrawn from there by the time of Patrick's birth. But let me check with the Rector. Bill Tegner 17:19, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

He addressed the point in his sermon: "probably from Roman Britain". So I'll change that on the entry. He reiterated the point that St. Patrick was NOT English. The English, in so far as they existed at all at the time of St Patrick's birth, were in a small corner of north west Germany. Incidentally, at the risk of being a pedant, France was then Gaul, and Normandy certainly didn't exist. Bill Tegner 13:03, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Actually,the Angles and the Saxons came from a small corner of North West Germany.Its a bit simplistic to refer to them as English.There were other groups involved as well.

If it may help to throw some light on waters which are already adequately muddied, the word "Britain" derives from the Old English "Brettisc," a word with its roots in the Celtic language spoken by the people of "Britain" (Penguin Etymological Dictionary) and it originally referred to the Celtic people who inhabited what is now approximately England and Wales, prior to the arrival of Anglo-Saxons, Vikings, Normans etc. Patrick's name points to the Roman "Patrician" and may indicate that he was, at least, of the Roman ruling classes.PeadarMaguidhir 07:59, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

May I introduce a little levity into the learned discussion above? In the Philadelphia Parade, the Italian-American community of "South Philly" participates with an elaborate float. A banner on the side reads, "The Noblest Roman of Them All;"PeadarMaguidhir 08:35, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

St Patrick does "not come from England". . . . ST PATRICK WAS BORN IN WALES! --MidnightGalaxy 22:59, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

See above. His birthplace is disputed, and in any event neither England nor Wales existed at the time of his birth, though Britain did. Millbanks 22:32, 4 April 2007 (UTC)


Holyoke Parade

It is still believed that the Holyoke St. Patrick's Day parade still claims the title for the 2nd largest parade in the US behind NYC. Why was this over looked? It is a widely known fact in the North East. Is this because they do not usually hold the parade on March 17th? It is often the following Sunday. Many people were curious to find that Holyoke was not even mentioned in the Wiki article at all. Here is the link to their parade site with the claim:


The city even created it's own tartan for the event, which is pretty neat! Check it out :)

  • So add it in! If it's the second-largest parade in the country, you're right, it deserves a mention. Fullobeans (talk) 17:10, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Gay groups denied

Why is there nothing in this article about how Gay groups were/are not allowed to march in the NYC parade? Kingturtle (talk) 22:24, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Because it's not about the NYC Parade. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 22:34, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
The word parade occurs in this article over 70 times. There should be mention of how some parades do not allow gay groups and about how some gay groups have created their own parades. Kingturtle (talk) 22:44, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
So add it to Gay Pride Parade (New York City) or List of gay pride events or even create New York St. Patrick's Day Parade. This article is about Saint Patrick's day, not about controversies that some individual parades may have generated. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 23:30, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
That's an issue of major relevance to the New York parade (and the Boston parade, for that matter), but the parade itself deserves little more than a passing mention on a page about the whole of St. Patrick's Day. Given the amount of NYC parade information already included, I should think it warrants its own page with a resultant discussion of the exclusion controversy.Fullobeans (talk) 17:30, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Because this is written mainly by American people who think they're Irish - a multitude of sins are overlooked by them. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 12:48, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

We should work on a section called Parade controversies. Kingturtle (talk) 13:44, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
I don't see how this would work, unless all the controversies had something in common other than the fact they occurred on St Patrick Day parades. The point is, issues like gay groups' problems with New York's parade have very little to do with St Patrick's Day, and everything to do with the politics of an individual parade's organisers and the parade's location. It may be covered in a separate New York St. Patrick's Day Parade article, but it's not significant enough for this article.--Escape Orbit (Talk) 18:36, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

What day 2008?

So is it the 14th or the 15th this year? howcheng {chat} 06:10, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

I put it to the 15th, based on an article in the Irish Independent. I figure out of all news sources, an Irish news source is the most reliable in this case. howcheng {chat} 07:06, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Catholic News Service reports St. Joseph's observance is 15 March 2008 and St. Patrick's Day is the 14 March 2008. I'm unable to change your source. Irish Independent source is not as scholarly. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Patjee (talkcontribs) 15:51, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

CNS doesn't exactly say that. It says that the U.S. bishops' liturgy secretariat announced that St. Patrick's Day may be moved to Friday, March 14 (emphasis mine), and that Bishop J. Kevin Boland of Savannah, GA stated his diocese would be celebrating it on the 14th. It says nothing about other dioceses, especially in Ireland. howcheng {chat} 16:54, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Liturgically, March 15, 2008 in the United States we observe St. Joseph, Husband Of Mary. [2]. I went to Mass this morning (March 15, 2008) in the U.S. and the solemnity of St. Joseph was observed - not St. Patrick's Feast. Is personal witness 'scholarly' enough? Also, note this news source states the change of the St. Patrick Feast Day observance to be a decision made by Irish Catholics. [3] —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 21:08, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

As convincing as it may appear to you, "personal witness" is still original research ;-) TINYMARK 16:14, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

It's on the 17th March 2008 --Stripy42 (talk) 13:41, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

The Irish Independent source is dated early 2007, before it was realized that St Joseph's had to be moved as well. For a later source. See here - or We know now after the fact (does a photo of the liturgy from March 14 with St Patrick on it count as a source?) that it was celebrated on March 14. Perhaps we should correct this once and for all. FlyingOtter (talk) 17:03, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

River Dyed Green

As a chemist, I'm dubious that the photo on the front page shows the river dyed green "with fluorescein." Fluorescein solutions are orange, and while the fluoresce green, they don't look like that. I think it's probably a vegetable dye.

Not to mention fluoresceine is carcinogenic, and you would need a dangerously high concentration to make the river as green as that. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk) 13:40, 17 March 2007 (UTC).
Since no proof has been presented of what the dye is/was, I deleted that part of the caption. Johntex\talk 04:26, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

I live in Chicago and have never seen the river so green. Year-round its a muddled dark green, but for St. Patrick's, there is no difference.

The photo is definitely doctored

There's a video of them coloring the river here: - personally I think it's a bit odd that the first photo on a page about St Patrick is in Chicago though and not Ireland. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jonathanpops (talkcontribs) 10:40, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

The dye is orange. It produces green when in the river. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 03:02, 18 March 2008 (UTC)


I have not removed the above logo from the article, although it has no non-free use rationale and it is hard to see how it could have one? Seth Whales (talk) 12:15, 17 March 2008 (UTC)


The article states that St. Patrick used the Shamrock to explain the Trinity. I have no idea if that is true; however, this article in slate [4] claims the Shamrock/Trinity connection to be an 18th Century invention. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 19:32, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
The story of St. Patrick using the shamrock to explain the Trinity has been thought in Irish schools for years, regardless of if its true, it is relevantArcticEmmet (talk) 18:39, 3 May 2008 (UTC) yes —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 01:24, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

OK. The section called "Wearing of the Silver" is a malicious edit. First, it's ridiculous. Second, the attribution link leads only back to the Wikipedia article. Third, I looked up the article directly, just in case I was wrong, and the actual text from the article is this: Another misconception is the association of St. Patrick with the color green, Mahony said. The confusion perhaps arises from the phrase "the wearing of the green," which meant to wear a shamrock. St. Patrick used the three-leaved plant to explain the Trinity of the Christian religion. - Ben Llewellyn, Feb. 7, 2009

Biggest parade: NYC or Chicago?

In the "Celebration overview" section I removed this unsourced sentence which had a "citation needed" tag:

The largest St. Patrick's Day parade is held in Chicago and it is watched by over 2.5 million spectators.[citation needed]

I added a sentence saying New York City has the largest parade (2 million spectators; 150,000 marchers), sourced it to an AP article of 3/18/08. I looked on Google for a little while and found no source at all giving a larger number than NYC or a statement saying that Chicago's is the largest (aside from mirrors of this article on the Web). Anyone feel free to correct or adjust this, but please source it. Noroton (talk) 21:56, 18 March 2008 (UTC)


I don't see why the section on Drink was removed, St Patrick's day celebration are mainly celebrated in pubs, and Irish drinks are drunk. Whether it's tradition or not the Guinness connection with marketing st Patrick's day is undeniable. I did try to write it in a balanced way with regards to the commercialisation of the festival. If Guinness hadn't used it for advertising then no non Irish would celebrate it. At least in the UK.

--Stripy42 (talk) 13:38, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Outside of the UK Guinness isn't brewed in Ireland, it's all from Sleeman's in Canada, which is actually owned by the Japanese Sapporo. It's about as Irish as the plastic paddies. In otherwords, it has nothing to do with Saint Patrick's Day. Alcohol really has nothing to do with the celebration of a Christian Saint. The whole getting drunk thing is nothing but marketing. tyx (talk) 19:43, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
Guinness was sold to some big business foreign company not long ago and took a very strange streak. They use this stuff made of fish guts to filter called "finings" and there was some debate in British and American newspapers "Isn't this shocking for vegetarians?", "We do not think that any of the" (fish guts) "remain in the drink when it is ready to be sold", "Is it suitable for vegetarians?", "Yes". I think that info should go in any section on Guinness as a health warning but it is debatable what effect the secret finings will actually have on health. ~ R.T.G 09:10, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

"Outside of the UK Guinness isn't brewed in Ireland, it's all from Sleeman's in Canada..."

This is flatly wrong. Guinness is brewed in Dublin, Ireland. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 23:33, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Regardless of whether or not Guinness is brewed in ireland isn't drinking a long running tradition on st. patricks day? Shouldnt there be something about that? Did the association occur just as a result of st patricks day being a widely celebrated Irish holiday in the western world and people associate anything Irish with drinking? It seems to me that this holiday is more about drinking these days than a saint whos only exploits are vaguely denoted by himself (as i understand the case to be though i dont stand behind that with scholarly integrity). My point being there isnt anything about what actually happens these days on st patricks day —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 11:21, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Irish colonists?

The article says that St, Patrick's Day was brought to the US by Irish colonists... I just wondered if it was inappropriate phrasing, given that Ireland itself was being colonised by Britain at the time. Would 'immigrants' not be a better term, or, if one insists on using the term 'colonists', 'British-colonists-who-fancied-themselves-Irish', perhaps??! I know it's only a nitpick, but I thought it was a strange choice of words. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 14:55, 23 May 2008 (UTC) He was know as a criminal but he wasnt(that was before he drove the snakes out of Ireland!) —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 18:20, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

You are correct and your point is not a nit-pick as colonisation and immigration are very different. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 11:09, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Historical Violence

They say you should eat pooh.Saint Patrick's Day is an annual feast day which celebrates Saint Patrick one of the patron saints of Ireland, and is generally celebrated on March 17. The day is the national holiday of Ireland. It is a bank holiday in Northern Ireland and a public holiday in the Republic of Ireland, Montserrat, and the Canadian province of Newfoundland and Labrador. In the rest of Canada, Great Britain, Australia, the United States and New Zealand, it is widely celebrated but is not an official holiday. It became a feast day in the Roman Catholic Church due to the influence of the Waterford-born Franciscan scholar Luke Wadding in the early part of the 17th century, and is a holy day of obligation for Roman Catholics in Ireland. The date of the feast is occasionally, yet controversially, moved by church authorities when March 17 falls during Holy Week; this happened in 1940 when Saint Patrick's Day was observed on April 3 in order to avoid it coinciding with Palm Sunday, and happened again in 2008, having been observed on 15 March. March 17 will not fall during Holy Week again until 2160. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 17:05, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

         What does this have to do with the issue of Violence?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 21:57, 13 October 2008 (UTC) 

St.patrick is a great saint please talk appropriate about him

he didnt say the saint was bad, just that the way the holiday is celebrated by certain people is "bad".

Celebration Overview

Under the heading 'Celebration Overview' the "Other large parades..." is out of place.

Latter Comment: Found the problem and am restoring a block of text that disappeared here...

  • 17:09, 21 December 2008 AnomieBOT (Talk | contribs) (39,717 bytes) (Rescuing orphaned refs ("apdh" from rev 258762403))
  • 16:58, 21 December 2008 (Talk) (39,495 bytes) (→Celebration overview)

Leprechauns (talk) 04:48, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Found an erroneous four letter word in a cite that may have caused BOT to delete the block of text. Fixed it.

Leprechauns (talk) 14:23, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Foreign Countries

The countries listed here should have Either A) a (historically) large Irish community in them or B) have some connection as in that a significant portion of the populace celebrate Saint Patrick's day. So right now I'm thinking: USA, Canada, Great britain, NZ,south africa, Monserrat and maybe Argentina and Mexico. Thefirstgolfoffer (talk) 09:40, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

A reasonable idea, but I have two questions;
  • Why?
  • What basis are you using to define countries with "a significant portion" or "large"?
I can appreciate the need for drawing the line somewhere, and the need to ensure the countries mentioned have cites. But I don't see either as a problem yet. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 10:26, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for your input. As to why, well with countries such as Denmark or Japan, the festivities aren't really that big and certainly not notable. I know we can't really refer to other Wiki articles, but take a look at the Irish Diaspora article. What basis are you using to define countries with "a significant portion" or "large"? Good point. The thing is, nearly every western country in the world has an Irish expat community, they all celebrate it, thats still no real reason to introduce it into the article such as with Denmark. Thefirstgolfoffer (talk) 16:56, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

URUGUAY Who is the jackass who keeps deleting the Uruguay entry? Have you ever been to Montevideo on St Patrick's Day? I have. That's why I submitted it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 03:33, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

There seems to be a habitual ignoring of South America. Someone is bemoaning the lack of Argentina below... --Candlewicke ST # :) 20:43, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

Why is there a reference to binge drinking in the NZ section. Not to take away for that problem - but NZ is not exactly the only place in the world people drink on st patricks day. It is covered in the previous sentence anyway - "the streets are often filled with revellers drinking and making merry from early afternoon until late at nigh". Also why "As in Australia," - NZ has strong Irish traditions stretching back to gold rush days, later many Irish immigrated as "fencibles" - part time British army soldiers - nothing to do with Australia (although I am sure they have a as strong a tradition as we do). —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 20:28, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

Not even a mention of Buenos Aires??

That is pretty lame. Buenos Aires has a rather larger St Patricks Day (night)celebration where city streets are shut with revellers. Argentina has the largest celtic immigrant population in the world of a non-former British Colony. And there is not even an honorable mention of the festivities? The dugout (talk) 19:18, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Any Argentinean Wikipedians of Irish descent to solve this? --Candlewicke ST # :) 20:40, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

Not an official holiday in U.S.

"In Canada, Great Britain, Australia, the United States and New Zealand, it is widely celebrated but is not an official holiday." March 17th is an official holiday in Boston, albeit for Evacuation Day, but the effect is the same. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 10:44, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Scranton, Pennsylvania

"Due to the rich history of Scranton participation in St. Patrick's Day festivities it is one of the oldest and most populated parades in the United States. It has been going on annually since 1862 by the St. Patrick's Day Parade Association of Lackawanna County and the parade has gotten attention nationally as being one of the better St. Patrick's Day parades. "

Oh come on. "Better"? This is an encyclopedia. Please Edit. (talk) 15:31, 17 March 2009 (UTC)


I found it odd that attending Mass or at least a church service was excluded from "celebrations" in the infobox. St. Patrick's Day is still a Christian feast day, and indeed a national church holiday and holy day of obligation among Roman Catholics in Ireland. --Grimhelm (talk) 22:52, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Links to Other Articles

What does the Shirley Temple movie have to do with St. Patrick's day? —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 23:51, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

The controversy regarding GLBT groups participation in the parades needs to be mentioned.

The only news that St. Patricks day has generated since in recent years is regarding the inclusion or exclusion of gay groups. A few links :

These are just a handful of articles on the subject. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Irishgrrl (talkcontribs) 19:35, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

Surely only news is a bit far? This seems to be centred on New York only... --Candlewicke ST # :) 20:38, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
Boston had the same controversy, though it is certainly not the only news/controversy surrounding either the parade or the holiday

There are not just a handful of articles on the subject. The New York parade's exclusion of openly gay organisations is a perennial topic of controversy and attention well beyond the city, and is far more controversial than any other aspect of St Patrick's Day parades (including the unapologetic presence of former IRA members). I have noted the controversy, with citations from the New York Times from different years, and there are many more available. DeanKeaton (talk) 00:49, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Nope. It doesn't need to be mentioned...WP is not a soapbox and that is what this whole thing is about. It would be giving undue weight to a fringe concern.
⋙–Berean–Hunter—► ((⊕)) 00:56, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Mentioning the controversy is not providing a soapbox. As the several citations from the New York times demonstrated, this has been a persistent and prominent controversy over many years. The two main things that anyone from outside New York is likely to know about parade is (1) that it is huge, wonderful, etc., which I think it is and (2) that there has been a history of disagreement about allowing / disallowing openly gay participation. Gay issues in New York City are most definitely not a fringe concern. I am not, personally, writing this from a partisan point of view. If any 'controversy' is of fringe or minor concern it is the one about republican involvement, which almost no one cares about.

DeanKeaton (talk) 02:18, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Sorry Berean, I was not trying to get into a revert war. I missed the first revert, thinking it was a problem with my browser.

Not a didn't blossom into a revert war; discussion is always better :)
⋙–Berean–Hunter—► ((⊕)) 13:02, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

This topic does not seem to me to fit within the scope of undue weight. The controversy is prominent, regardless (i) of its merits, about which the article does not take a view on, and (ii) of the 'natural' importance or otherwise of gays in St Patrick's day parades. It would be quite consistent to argue that the whole controversy is the result of a series of political stunts, that organizers should be allowed to exclude gays, etc. and still allow that the controversy is notable in this context.

Note that in at least one year the parade was nearly banned because of this issue.

DeanKeaton (talk) 03:34, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

To be prudent, I am waiting to see if other editors want to chime in on the issue to get the 'community' opinion...
⋙–Berean–Hunter—► ((⊕)) 13:02, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

In Canada - Reference to Waterloo's Celebration

The whole paragraph on Waterloo appears to just be a plug for some sorority's Oktoberfest celebration. Living in Waterloo right now, I haven't heard anything about their St. Patrick's Day celebration, so I think it clearly needs a citation to prove that it is in fact accurate and notable. Absent that, it ought to be removed. (talk) 06:02, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Why March 17th?

Does anybody have any idea why it is celebrated on March 17th? Could it possibly be a christian take over of some early pagan celebration on the same date? —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 19:05, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Tuesday,March 17 is the feast of Patrick, bishop and patron of Ireland and Nigeria. Patrick wasn't Irish; he was Welsh-Italian. His name wasn't Patrick, it was Succat. He wasn't the first Christian missionary sent to Ireland--that was St. Palladius. We do know he was the slave of an Irish noble, escaped to Britain, studied for the priesthood, was ordained, made a bishop and returned to Ireland. There he spent the rest of his life converting the Celts to Christianity. In April, 1961, he was declared by the Sacred Congregation of Rites to be the Patron of Nigeria. [1]Holy Trinity Parish (Trinidad Area Catholic Community),"From the Desk of Sister Didyaknow",Trinidad,Colorado, March 15,2009, Third Sunday of Lent.

Saint Patty's Day

I changed St. Pat's to St. Patrick's in one of the sentences, just to make it sound more formal and proper. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sed2535 (talkcontribs) 03:22, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

I always thought that St. Patrick's Day was shortened to St. Patty's Day and not St. "Paddy's". I think that just sounds unintelligent. Someone change it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 06:54, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

See below - whether or not it sounds unintelligent, "Paddy's Day" is what the day is known as in Ireland, which I would imagine gives it some precedence given the day in question. I suspect the tendency to say "Patty's day" in the US may have come from differences in accent - the way a typical Irish accent pronounces "Paddy" could easily sound to American ears like "Patty". This is purely speculation on my part however.
Note also that "Paddy" is by far the more common diminutive form of Patrick in Ireland, the name "Patty" being pretty much unheard of for a male. CupawnTae (talk) 12:12, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Nobody in Ireland has the slightest clue where this name came from. It is colloquially referred to as Saint Paddy's day, Paddy being the informal treatment of Patrick.

THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS, SAINT PATTY'S DAY. In correctness, it is "Saint Patrick's Day" or even sometimes refered to as "Paddy's Day" in short by the Irish. The use of the term "SAINT PATTY'S DAY", is something that American's have made up, by miss-spelling & mis-pronunciation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 09:34, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Agreed, as the article stated until this morning, it has always been known as Paddy's Day here in Ireland. On the other hand, a large number of Americans say "St. Patty's Day" so how about something like "colloquially Paddy's Day (or sometimes St. Patty's Day, particularly in the United States)"? CupawnTae (talk) 11:58, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
Patty is the common abbreviation of Patricia. Please do not include any mention of "Patty's Day", even mentioning how badly wrong it is would be trivia and inappropriate for an encyclopedia. Even if Wikipedia isn't always particularly encyclopedic we can at least try and keep the quality level up. -- Horkana (talk) 02:28, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

I live in the US and always spelled it correctly as Paddy. The only people I've seen use Patty are usually not Irish-American and therefore when they hear paddy they think of the female name patty in their head. I did do some research on Saint Patricia, so St. Patty's day would be august 25.

Littlest rebel?

{{editsemiprotected}} please remove the link added in the following: &

The above links document the addition of an odd article in the 'see also' section. I checked the article that was linked, but it's connection escapes me. I'm removing it, but if I'm incorrect, feel free to replace it.

(also, it was a pain searching the history to find those, is there any quick way to search edits?) ~~ PidGin128 (talk) 22:33, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

  • Guess I've neglected my account for too long... anyone else mind cleaning it up? ~~ PidGin128 (talk) 22:43, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
Already doneMs2ger (talk) 14:42, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Good Friday query

{{editsemiprotected}} The earliest date Easter can be is april 22 with Good Friday being March 20. Therefore St. Patrick's Day could never be Good Friday. This should be taken out of the introductory paragraph. (talk) 11:02, 17 March 2009 (UTC)tribefan1

Not done for now: Further discussion needed I think. The next paragraph explains how the date can sometimes be changed so it's not clear to me that it couldn't be Good Friday. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 22:36, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
Martin, I think you may have answered your own hypothesis there - the only time it's not on 17th March is when another important Church holiday falls on 17th March in that year. So if they had to move St Patrick's day on a given year, they obviously wouldn't move it to the same day as Good Friday. +1 for removing mention of Good Friday from the paragraph. CupawnTae (talk) 12:47, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

DeanKeaton (talk) 05:46, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Shamrock/s in the corner of Quebec's flag

There are/is no Shamrock/s in the corner of Quebec's flag, however there are Fleur-de-lis. If the poster looked at the city's Coat of Arms, he/she may have confused the maple leafs as shamrocks, but would still be in error. Someone should delete this incorrect data. Jonjdoe (talk) 13:50, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Changed the title. This appears to have been corrected now DeanKeaton (talk) 05:44, 30 March 2009 (UTC)


Drywall11 has added this section a number of times now over the last couple of years, with it being eventually removed each time. It's not terrible, but has problems with it that are mentioned when it has been removed. Perhaps Drywall11 could fix these before re-adding?

  • Uncited - citing any of this information from a reliable source would go a long way to preventing it being removed in future.
  • tone - it's a bit chatty throughout, sounding rather like a tourist guide
  • "Despite its miniscule population of true Irishmen," - "miniscule" tells us nothing, how many? Cite? Who defined what a "true" Irishman is. Do Irish woman not count?
  • "the capital city of Montevideo is alive with St. Patrick's Day festivities" - See tone. In what way is it "alive"?
  • "One bizarre tradition" - Who has decided it is "bizarre"? Is this not an opinion?
  • "This second task is rarely achieved." - Has someone conducted a survey? Is this in the editor's experience?

Thanks. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 15:08, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Longest Running US Parades

The list was far too long, so I deleted all the listings after 1900. When the oldest began in the 1700s, 1968 is hardly notable. CrashCart9 (talk) 19:56, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

The current list, which has grown since I merged in text from elsewhere on the page seems too long to me. DeanKeaton (talk) 06:29, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

The years the parades date from, especially Boston and New York, need better citations that they have now. In Boston it's not clear that the 1737 event involved a parade and in New York, I've yet to see solid evidence for a parade before 1766, although a parade in 1762 is sometimes mentioned.

DeanKeaton (talk) 06:29, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

Proposed Deletion of 'Orange' section

I'm a 34 year old Irishman and this is the first I've heard of people wearing Orange as an act of defiance on St Paddy's Day. The only source cited seems to be a blog, which is hardly authoritative. I say delete this part. Who's with me? --Eamonnca1 (talk) 23:38, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

I have long heard in my family that one does not wear green on Saint Patrick's Day, as it is a celebration of driving my Irish Protestant ancestors OUT of Ireland. Wearing orange deliberately is then about being confrontational, though I have heard of it. I feel this section should stay, or be put back. A section on the controversy would also be good. --David Garfield (talk) 21:32, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
With all respect, anecdotal personal stories are not encyclopedic sources. See WP:RS. --Eamonnca1 (talk) 22:22, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
Agreed, and given the lack of citations, I am removing the section. If someone can provide good citations backing up the claim, it can be reconsidered. DeanKeaton (talk) 05:07, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
With all due respect, the trend is an American one, so being an Irishman actually makes you less of an authority to speak on the subject. With respect to citations, some are offered in the post itself. It needs to be kept.--YHoshua (talk) 14:20, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
I've tidied this a bit. Two of the cites lead to identical text, which didn't say anything about defiance. Apparently these Protestants are 'taking part in the fun'. Ahh, to be so innocent. But the stuff about the the orange order is entirely uncited. Orange men marching on St Patrick's day??? The rest of the paragraph is a matter of historical record, but its all giving undue weight to something supported only by a letter to the editor of a provincial US newspaper. I fully support removing it entirely unless better cites are given. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 14:43, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
If there is a common practice of wearing Orange on St Patrick's Day that would certainly be notable, and it's fairly plausible. But this is still unsourced. The only citation in the current text is to a letter written by Joshua Claybourn of Evansville, much of which is identical to earlier versions of this section, and the previous citation was to the intheagora blog. Yhoshua, according to your user page, you are both the letter-writer and the founder of intheagora. If you have credible citations, showing that this is common, please give them. Otherwise I agree that the content should be removed once more. DeanKeaton (talk) 23:13, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
It's been put back in again - I hope this doesn't turn into an edit war. The source cited does not meet WP:SOURCES, and since it was written by this wikipedian it also fails WP:SPS. It even borders on WP:REDFLAG since it's such an extraordinary claim. I'm removing it. --Eamonnca1 (talk) 05:29, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Wearing of green

I have tightened this up, mainly to improve the quality of the citations and reduce the poorly sourced claims. I have also omitted the discussion on when green became a national colour of Ireland, as opposed to being linked to St Patrick's Day, since the dates and rationale for this are not trivial to establish, and seem to belong more on the page discussing the Irish national flag. We could consider a link to that page. DeanKeaton (talk) 04:59, 1 April 2009 (UTC)


I have just moved around a lot of text, mainly to remove duplicate material, or text that was simply not in its natural place, without much change to content. Comments, suggestions, and further improvements are welcome. Of course, the article still needs a lot of improvement in its citations.

DeanKeaton (talk) 06:34, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

Biographical material on Saint Patrick

I propose deleting the biographical material on St Patrick in the new "History" section, since this has a higher-quality wiki page of its own already. DeanKeaton (talk) 05:06, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Other patron saints of Ireland

I keep seeing a lot of references to the "three patron saints" of Ireland. Someone has done a lot of work on putting references to them in many articles. See the reference in the lead paragraph of this article.

However, the reality is that almost no one in Ireland or abroad actually recognises Brigid or Columba as the country's patrons - even though this is theoretically correct. To the overwhelming majority of people St Patrick is the patron saint, and Paddy's Day is the national day. Can we reflect that reality in Irish articles? Michael of Lucan (talk) 17:57, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Need some more history in Ireland

I came on to see how far observances and practices go back. I was a bit disappointed, as the entirety of the information preceding the 20th century was "In the past, Saint Patrick's Day was celebrated as a religious holiday. It became a public holiday in 1903..." in the history section and a short bit in the lead about when it officially became a feast day, but also indicating it was observed before that point. Almost the entirety of the "history" section deals with 1990 and after. The absence of earlier history is underlined by the fact that the Canada and USA sections describe practices back to the 18th century. IMHO (talk) 21:09, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

I'm not Irish but as far as I know there's not really a lot more to say about it. It used to be an extra day to go to church and visit family and that was about it. I suspect that it's always been a bigger deal in the US and Canada (and other foreign countries) than in Ireland, people tend to become a lot more patriotic when they're away from their own country, especially when they're in a minority. Big, public celebrations were probably a great way for Irish immigrants to encorage a sense of community and generally feel less alone in their new home.

However if it can be confirmed by someone who knows for sure that what we've got now is pretty much all there is to say it might be worth explaining that, just to make it clear that it's not a case of not knowing. (And of course if that is the problem it'd be even better if someone who knows more could add the info.) I'd follow Wiki advice and be bold about it but like I said I don't know for sure. Danikat (talk) 17:03, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Removal of Moscow?

A detail about how Moscow celebrates St. Patrick's Day was added a while back. It's odd that it's now no longer there, considering the fact that the Mayor of Dublin recently attended the parade herself, along with the fact that the reason the parade takes place was due to a collaborative effort between Aer Rianta and Moscow City. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dudeglove (talkcontribs) 15:03, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Sounds like a legitimate detail. You should re-add it. -- (talk) 03:17, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

Controversy (NYC parade)

Why is there no mention in the article of GLBT groups being banned from marching in the NYC parade? "Undue weight" to the article is a bullshit argument, btw, so you're going to have to think of something else. This is 2010. -- (talk) 03:16, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

This article is about Saint Patrick's Day. Not about St Patrick Day parades, not about New York, and not about past controversies in the NYC parade. Yes, it talks of parades and the parade in New York, but if we are to cover all the detail of every parade's history, politics and controversies we would have a ridiculously long, and unfocussed article. The article is quite long enough as it is.
If you think the subject is notable and have adequate sources, why don't you create either a New York Saint Patrick's Day Parade article, or even a New York Saint Patrick's Day Parade GLBT Controversy article?
See also previous discussion on this.

--Escape Orbit (Talk) 18:10, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Saint Patrick Day

Boulder Colorado has a parade as well as Denver Colorado - EVERY YEAR - Please, bring your page up to date. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 20:18, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Extra St Patrick's Day resource

Hi, I would like to suggest an extra website resource: the St Patrick's Day section of (Tourism Ireland's website). The site has information on origins and traditions as well as events going on around the world each year in celebration of St Patrick's Day. The relevant page on the site is: Look forward to receiving thoughts. Many thanks Krstan (talk) 12:26, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

Commercialisation section?

I wonder if there should be a "commercialisation of St. Patrick's Day" section? St. Patrick's Day in the UK at least is heavily promoted by Guinness and other drinks companies and I wonder if there should be discussion as the commercial influences on how the day is celebrated. I can't think of another internationally celebrated religious festival that is so heavily associated with a single commercial product - the kind of marketing and association Coca-Cola and others would do anything for!--mgaved (talk) 23:50, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Public Holiday

Just made a small edit and added to the para. describing places where St. Patrick's Day is a public holiday. The previous version stated only Ireland including N. Ireland. Newfoundland and Labrador and Montserrat have been added to the list. Please see below for sources:

Newfoundland: Montserrat: —Preceding unsigned comment added by M. (talkcontribs) 06:17, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Philadelphia 2nd or 3rd

Why do any google search produce that Philadelphia is the 2nd oldest rather then third. a search with the third produces resutls with the word second. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 06:49, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Alcohol consumption

Why does this article downplay that the holiday has come to be seen as an excuse to get drunk and is unmoored from Irish culture? —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 13:50, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Valid point. The majority of people in the US celebrate this holiday only as a drinking holiday for which there is no other tangible meaning aside from trivial considerations to the color green and the country of Ireland. I think this would merit considerable mention to how this holiday is celebrated presently, at least for the United States. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 19:03, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Photo in Customs today

I'm talking about File:Green_Chicago_River_on_Saint_Patricks_Day_2009.jpg. Frankly, it's terrible. It looks terrible, the Photomatixing that it's gotten has completely destroyed any resemblance to reality (reducing its encyclopedic value), and it's taking up a huge amount of the page right now. We already have a green river photo at the top of the article. Would anyone second removing this? -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 17:39, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Have to agree. The full size image is very impressive, but reduced to this size it's shoddy and faked looking. The colours in particular look enhanced, throwing doubt on the display of the green river, which is the whole point of the image being there. It's obviously gone through significant post-processing (I don't think the camera that on the image's metadata is capable of taking a shot like this), so it's encyclopaedic accuracy is questionable. We already have a good photo of this at the top of the article, so I say remove. It's a great image, but not for an encyclopaedia. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 18:07, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Green dye in the Chicago river

On the Chicago river page, it says 40 gallons, on this page it says 40 pounds, of dye are used to dye the river.

the source used by the chicago river page is this:

on that page, it claims 40 gallons.

The source given for on this page, Source 2, is There is nothing in that video that talks about the river, nothing in that video that talks about chicago at all.

I am not sure where the 100 original pounds/gallons came from. - - nevermind, I found the source that should have been cited: That webpage has most of the information given in that paragraph. someone should change the source, or add a new one. And someone should research the 40 pounds vs. 40 gallons. I personally would trust history channel over a news site, "chicago weekend fun," However, the news site is local and may have better information or more up to date information. (talk) 22:48, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

[0utw\g nrnurng t tnu —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 23:58, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Protestant Irish?

I am curious about the way in which the holiday is regarded by Irish Protestants, particularly in Northern Ireland, in the past and today, unionist or otherwise. I haven't found any really citable information online in a really quick search, other than that some may wear orange and others don't celebrate. But maybe somebody over in WP: Ireland has better information.Neumannk (talk) 01:37, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Not a Public Holiday but a Bank Holiday

In Northern Ireland it is, very unfortunately, not a public holiday but instead a bank holiday so most of us actually have a work. The Northern Ireland Assembly have discussed this frequently but as of yet no decision has been made to make it a public holiday. Jorgenpfhartogs (talk) 12:09, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

4.8 In Germany

Since 1996, the biggest Saint Patrick's Day parade of continental Europe is held in Munich on the 17th of March. The parade is organized and run by local companies and has about 1000 participants, and at least 25.000 to 30.000 people watching it.[1] (talk) 13:01, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Edit war over "wearing orange"

The most recent discussion is located here, which I'm guessing the comment for this revert is referring to. The discussion did not end in a consensus, but rather a self-justified removal by someone who clearly doesn't know his history of the Irish Flag colors. So now we come to: "how do you use 'reliable sources' to verify a gradually emergent tradition?" Well, to do that, I would imagine one would need first-hand coverage of the occurrence, right? The reason it was removed last time was apparently because it looked as though it was "just a thing" local to Evansville, IN, which is understandable with the previous lack of explanation. However, my recent edits explains the predominantly American tradition. If you look at the comments on the article history, you'll also notice that I have two more citations to add that are being requested for white-listing. A rough list of locations this tradition is recognized so far now by my three (two pending) references is Evansville, IN; Tuscaloosa, AL; Central Ohio; as well as my wife and I who are in CA but separately come from MI and OH/PA respectively, both by way of the British Isles a few generations back, who both have this tradition passed down in our families. How is this NOT verification enough to be included? ₪— CelticWonder (T·C) " 01:35, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

You would be wrong to imagine that what we need is a first hand coverage of the occurrence. Anyone could write a blog that is first hand coverage of them doing anything for St Patrick's Day, but that would not merit its inclusion here. Wearing orange is the same. What we need is a reliable source discussing people wearing orange, with some evidence that it is not just a small number of people's fanciful and recent idea. What you have cited is essentially from a person's blog, and what you wish to add (once whitelisted) is an article about the same person's idea about wearing green. While there are claims about it being "increasingly popular", nothing factual is quoted that show it to be anything but a fad promoted by one person. One person's idea reported in one local paper does not merit inclusion and I'm afraid that adding up your personal experiences, plus a random smattering of coverage, as evidence of a tradition is original synthesis, with isn't sufficient either.
It was for these reasons that it was previously removed shortly after being added, and it remains the responsibility of those who wish it to be included to demonstrate that it actually is a practice with some significance and history. I don't doubt that you have a family history of this, but how does the reader know that this is in anyway common practice? Please do not re-add until you have a well sourced cite.
The addition you added about the song The Orange and the Green is also entirely speculation and cannot be said to have anything to do with this practice. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 18:15, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Past bans

I recall a history channel special which claimed Saint Patrick's Day was banned in Ireland by the British for some time. This supposedly increased the popularity of Saint Patrick's day celebrations in the Americas where the ban was not in effect. The British never outlawed the holiday in the colonies because it encouraged Irish to volunteer for military service. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pcw27 (talkcontribs) 03:40, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

RfC: Historical/cultural reasons for wearing orange on St. Patrick's Day, and emergent tradition -- Notable?


I have provided a verifiable, historical explanation for the purpose of this tradition, as well as cited it appropriately with coverage from multiple locations in the country (including two that were recently approved on white-list). Considering the nature of the tradition however, it has not yet gained "newsworthy" coverage (why would it?), but look no further than,, or and you'll find plenty of people asking about it and somehow plenty of people know the answer to "why?". ₪— CelticWonder (T·C) " 22:46, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

You have provided one blog cite, one self-published cite, and one local newspaper discussing the blog. If it is a truly widespread tradition that is "increasingly popular", why is it so difficult to find any reference in a reliable source? Much of the historical explanation cited simply centres around the use of orange and green in Irish culture. That is well known and long established, but that does not support claims of any practice of wearing orange on St Patrick's Day, and it certainly doesn't demonstrate that it is becoming more common.
There are certainly discussion to be found in the likes of that refers to wearing orange on St Patrick's day. But I can't find any that state it is common place, a tradition, or "increasingly popular". Most simply refer to why it may be regarded as a Protestant statement or a "bad idea"
Note that I am not saying that it never happens, or that no-one ever employs the symbolism claimed, but it is not acceptable that Wikipedia be practically the only place on the internet that claims it as a significant and established St Patrick's Day tradition --Escape Orbit (Talk) 23:48, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

I have removed the 'orange' content. In regards to the above concerns, after a week there has been no reliably sourced cites produced that make it clear it is "increasingly popular", and not something practised by a tiny number of people with no significance beyond one man's blog. If it hasn't yet gained "newsworthy coverage" then it shouldn't be on Wikipedia. This can always be restored if good sources can be found at a later date --Escape Orbit (Talk) 16:57, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

As initiator of RfC, I am not satisfied that an RfC has taken place yet. Since I have 30 days, I would like to wait for a successful RfC to be carried out. As this has not happened yet, I have undone your revert. ₪— CelticWonder (T·C) " 17:00, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
I too am not satisfied that the RfC has taken place. So please remove your additions to the article until it is concluded. The RfC can quite happily continue without this content being added to the page. If the RfC is settled in this new material's favour it can be then be added.
If you wish to discuss the content please respond to my above questions. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 17:20, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
I am adding something that I believe is valid and properly sourced, and the RfC is about the revert by one person (in this case: you) who disagrees, even after the white-listing request was successful (as in, it would've been declined if they flat-out thought it wasn't "good enough"). The added RfC and now 3O are asserting my concern with YOUR removal of the content (specifically your opinion of insufficient sourcing), not the unwarranted (your pov, not mine) addition of it. ₪— CelticWonder (T·C) " 17:51, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
I see the RfC is about an addition to the article by one person (in this case you). My asserted concern is with YOUR addition of content, already removed after discussion shortly after it was first added.
White-listing is not a mark of an approved cite. It just means you are citing from a website that is black-listed due to previous spamming or inappropriate linking. All white-listing has achieved is recognition that it is not being used to spam. If anything, it tells us that the cite is from a source that has a questionable history on Wikipedia.
But really, this is all immaterial. You still haven't addressed the concerns expressed. If you could do that we would be done here.
  • Please explain why you believe a blog is a reliable source for verifying this content, despite guidelines saying otherwise.
  • Please show where it is demonstrated that this is a "tradition" that is "increasingly popular", and not just a passing fancy of a tiny number of people. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 15:35, 31 March 2010 (UTC)


1. anymore.
2. and
3. Three.
₪— CelticWonder (T·C) " 19:07, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
To quote Ace Ventura, "Awwwwllllrighty, then!" Based on this declaration, I am boldly withdrawing the RfC and 3O and deleting the text from the article. — TRANSPORTERMAN (TALK) 19:50, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
You're welcome then. I hope EO is happy with his "win". I'm so sick of this offense/defense nonsense. ₪— CelticWonder (T·C) " 19:58, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
This is not a "win" and I do not regard it as such. Wikipedia is not a game. All I ask is that guidelines and policy are applied, content is properly supported by cites when questioned and previous consensus is noted. This content has been questioned before as either dubious or greatly over-stated, and nothing you added to it improved it. It is in Wikipedia's interests that its content is verifiable and not a just vehicle for people to either launch new ideas, or promote little observed minor practices. Please feel free to bring this back up when this "emergent tradition" acquires notability beyond one man's blog. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 10:08, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

All three sources are self–published, none of the three have any kind of editorial review. None meet the standards of reliable sources and should be removed. The information that they have been given to support should then be {{fact}} tagged to allow the editor who added it time to try to come up with new sources. As stated in the documentation for the {{fact}} tag, the best practice here would be to allow the information to remain in the article, unsourced, for about a month before it is deleted if reliable sources are not added. (I would also note that the author of the In the Agora piece is the same person as is reported on in the (which is not a newspaper but something more like WikiNews) piece.) A Third Opinion request is not really proper while an RfC is pending; see the Third Opinion FAQ. — TRANSPORTERMAN (TALK) 18:27, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Third Opinion request was a suggestion made by the opposition, but thanks for your input. ₪— CelticWonder (T·C) " 18:31, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
The Third Opinion was my suggestion. Sorry, wasn't aware it was not appropriate. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 15:35, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
I have also updated the wording to be in compliance with WP:SPS. ₪— CelticWonder (T·C) " 18:57, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
Change in wording makes no difference: Joshua Claybourne is not an "established expert on the topic of the article whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable third-party publications". The sources simply are not acceptable reliable sources per WP:SPS and I'm kind of baffled as to how you can contend otherwise. — TRANSPORTERMAN (TALK) 21:45, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for your input. However, I would point out that this content was previously fact tagged and removed a year ago. This is its second attempt at inclusion and it is failing for exactly the same reasons. I don't believe it merits another month. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 15:55, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Is Saint Patrick's day a holiday?

I have twice in the past 12 hours removed the word "holiday" from the lead, because St Patrick's Day is NOT known as a holiday in at least part of the English speaking, Christian oriented world. I referred other editors to the Holiday article, so they would understand, and twice now others have insisted on putting the word holiday back in. If I revert again I will be running close to the 3RR, so I have to try here. Please accept that it is NOT known as a holiday everywhere. Certainly not in Australia. To insist that it is a holiday is probably US-centrism, along with not accepting a truth AND a source of information from someone else. (Yes, I am a little frustrated.) HiLo48 (talk) 00:14, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

What is the problem you have with religious holiday? Holiday can mean more than just "day off work". Would Feast Day be more appropriate? Either way, what is probably most important is the terminology used in Ireland, where the day is most associated with. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 00:35, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
The problem I have with religious holiday is that it is a term not used everywhere in the English speaking world. To put it in the lead of an article without qualification is just plain simply wrong. It's an understandable mistake for people with limited exposure to global use of the language to make, but not understandable if they insist on continuing with such usage after the truth has been explained. It's like American editors who keep "correcting" British English spelling to American English spelling where American English does not belong. HiLo48 (talk) 00:55, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
"The truth" is often open to interpretation. That's why it often needs discussion. There are a number of ways St Patrick's Day could be described but two things are pretty clear; it has a religious origin (i.e. is a "holy day"), and it is a public day-off in Ireland, where most of the modern day practices surrounding the day originates. (In cases where there are regional language differences, Wikipedia usually favours the usage relating to the region most associated with the subject.) So the term "religious holiday" is pretty unambiguous and not open to much confusion. I don't suppose many readers, where-ever they are, are going to be plunged into confusion just because they personally don't get a day off on that date.
But I'm totally open to any suggestion you might have that summarises the day in a brief and more suitable fashion. Saying simply that "it occurs" isn't that informative for a lead sentence. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 17:35, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
I'm well aware of the "holy day" origin of "holiday", but I'm not aware of anywhere in the English speaking world where it is still used that way. To narrow the emphasis of the lead to usage in Ireland would be wrong. St Patricks Day is celebrated around the world more often these days as a display of an Irish connection, rather than the religious festival. People wear green. Rivers are turned green. Green beer is consumed. Very little to do with any Christian perspective. It's about being Irish when you're not in Ireland. Yes, to some the Christian part is important, but that's definitely a minority where I have seen the day celebrated. So, the relevant region is anywhere where there are people who claim an Irish ancestry. It's a festival day. Can we call it an annual festival? HiLo48 (talk) 19:48, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
Sorry, I didn't mean to suggest that you weren't aware of "holy day" (although I find it doesn't hurt to spell things out to avoid misunderstandings), but the reader may not be aware of this use of the term. In which case maybe Wikipedia can better inform them. That's why we use wikilinks, isn't it? You are right that the religious use of the word "holiday" is not common place, that's why I changed it to say, and link to, "religious holiday", which is certainly not unheard of. While St Patrick's day is, of course, no longer simply a religious holiday, I think it would be a mistake to omit the basis of it from the lead sentence. Some kind of explanation as to why it is "St" is needed. And it is still a religious event for millions of Catholics. "Annual festival" is not bad, but I still think it needs something to indicate its religious roots, most annual festivals have them. Would "annual festival based on a Catholic religious holiday" (or similar) be too wordy? Although, if we did this, the third sentence in the lead would need fine-tuning, as it covers some of the same ground. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 11:32, 13 November 2010 (UTC)
Holiday is defined by Wikipedia's article on the subject as a: "day designated as having special significance for which individuals, a government, or a religious group have deemed that observation is warranted. It is generally an official (more common) or unofficial observance of religious, national, or cultural significance, often accompanied by celebrations or festivities." I think this fits Saint Patrick's day to a tee. I can't the relevance of referring to the English speaking world or what people do there. That is not the yardstick by which we write Wikipedia articles. Once a holiday is celebrated as a holiday somewhere, English-speaking or not, is sufficient to describe it as a holiday. Wikipedia also describes Eid ul-Fitr and Canada day as holidays. — Blue-Haired Lawyer t 16:34, 13 November 2010 (UTC)
The whole area of Holiday in Wikipedia is a bit of a mess right now, due to some people trying to remove the unfortunate US-centrism of the earlier definition. But even now, at the top of that article it has qualifiers as to what it's talking about (it's clearly NOT global) and not far into the article it says "In Australia, Canada, and the UK, all usage of the word holiday means time away from normal employment or education." That does NOT include St Patrick's Day". HiLo48 (talk) 22:44, 13 November 2010 (UTC)
I've reverted your change Blue-Haired Lawyer. There's little point in us discussing things here if you're just going to plough on with editing anyway. Your examples do not help your argument; Eid ul-Fitr specifically says Muslim holiday, which makes it "religious", and Canada day is described as a National Day, not a holiday. I also don't follow your logic of "Once a holiday is celebrated as a holiday somewhere, English-speaking or not, is sufficient to describe it as a holiday." as it's circular tautology and, as it's already been made clear, the definition of "holiday" can be ambiguous. Wikipedia should should also stick to whatever is most common place, or most commonly associated, particularly in the lead. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 15:15, 14 November 2010 (UTC)
I reject the idea I was somehow ploughing ahead without discussing. A religious holiday is still a holiday. I just thought it was clearly contradictory to describe St. Patricks' day as a religious holiday and then proceed to say that: "[i]t has gradually become more of a secular celebration of Ireland's culture." — Blue-Haired Lawyer t 19:51, 14 November 2010 (UTC)
If a religious holiday is still a holiday, you would agree then that "religious holiday" is a more exact term that conveys more information succinctly to the reader?
Also, being a religious holiday does not preclude it from also being a more loosely defined "secular celebration". There is no contradiction that I can see.
Just to explain again, I'm open to any better descriptions anyone might suggest, but agree with HiLo48 that just "holiday" could be ambiguous, particularly to non-US readers. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 22:42, 14 November 2010 (UTC)
Not ambiguous. Wrong. HiLo48 (talk) 23:00, 14 November 2010 (UTC)
Well, either way, we are agreed that "holiday" should not stand alone in the lead sentence? --Escape Orbit (Talk) 23:21, 14 November 2010 (UTC)
It is a religious holiday and saying just holiday is incorrect. May Day is a holiday. Bjmullan (talk) 23:10, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from, 24 December 2010

{{edit semi-protected}} the montserrat info is WRONG - the failed slave uprising was 1768


Skinner, J. (2006) ‘Modernist anthropology, ethnic tourism and national identity: the contest for the commoditization and consumption of St. Patrick’s Day, Montserrat’ in, K. Meethan, A. Anderson & S. Miles (Eds) Anthropology and the production and consumption of tourism, London: CAB International, pp.253-271.

J. Skinner (2004) Before the Volcano: Reverberations of Identity on Montserrat, Kingston, Jamaica: Arawak Publications. (talk) 12:22, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

I've changed the date, with the refs you gave. Thanks.
If any of the rest of the section needs fixing, please add a further request.  Chzz  ►  18:31, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done

Correction: I had an edit conflict, and another user - Bjmullan (talk · contribs) - changed it before I did.  Chzz  ►  18:32, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
 :) Bjmullan (talk) 19:17, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

US Perspective overly represented AGAIN

I find it difficult to believe how an article on the feast day of the patron saint of the Republic of Ireland needs this much emphasis on the US perspective; it seems that everyone from the US has added their view on how their own town or city celebrates the day.

I can understand putting in specifics about the New York, Boston and perhaps Chicago celebrations as they are either significant due to the irish decendent populations in these cities or they are noteworthy for the way the day is celebrated (e.g. dying the Chicago river green) but can we really justify including the likes of Tallahassee etc?

Basically what I'm proposing here is to cut back the US section of the article and extend the Ireland section possibly splitting up into the two seperate countries; Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland.

I realise this kind of goes againtst WP:BB but we're talking about different cultures here so I'd rather get a discussion going involving the people from those cultures first.--Connelly90[AlbaGuBràth] (talk) 14:05, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

I agree completely that the USA is currently "overrepresented" by comparison to coverage of elsewhere. However I think this is due more to not enough info and media relating to Ireland and other places rather than "too much" about the USA. So I'd encourage adding material, but am less enthusiastic about making major cut backs of sections where we do have detailed info. We can spin off a seperate article "St. Patrick's Day in the United States" or something similar if the section gets overly long. -- Infrogmation (talk) 19:25, 11 January 2011 (UTC)
I think that adding a seperate article about "St. Patrick's Day in the United States" would add to the problem and encourage more people to extend the article by unnessiceraly adding their town's own celebrations, however unremarkable they may be. I agree that it would be better to extend the section on Ireland rather than remove parts from the section about the United States; but, do we really need a description of how the day is celebrated in places like Tallahassee? especially since it sounds like such a standerd celebration and there is nothing really notable about it (e.g. dying rivers green)--Connelly90[AlbaGuBràth] (talk) 11:14, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from Druweid, 13 January 2011

{{edit semi-protected}}

Under the sub-heading of parades; New York City, please change this:

"The parade is organized and run by the Ancient Order of Hibernians."

To this:

"The parade is organized and operated by the "St Patrick's Day Parade & Celebration Committee" which comprise of volunteers from the community and members of the Ancient Order of Hibernians."


"The Parade has been organized by volunteers since its inception 249 years ago and continues today with volunteers from the community and AOH..."

Consider: The AOH has a more direct involvement with the Baltimore, MD, parade, and freely lists themselves on two pages:

Unfortunately, there is no comprehensive biography of the committee members to verify which are members of the AOH, and which are not, but the statement from their website, "...volunteers from the community and AOH..." seems to confirm that not all committee members are AOH.

Also, I know there is a great deal of controversy over the omission of Gay and Lesbian groups, and they seem to be the most vocal about declaring the parade a "religous event," often claiming "it's run by the AOH" as proof to their claim. Intended or not, this may have created a biased perception of the depth of AOH's participation in the NYC parade.

Lastly, I called the phone number on the website, to reach the parade committee, and asked the member who answered (he didn't volunteer a name, I didn't ask) if the parade was organized or operated by the AOH, to which he flatly answered "No."

I look forward to your thoughts on this.

Druweid (talk) 14:41, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

Partly done: Those sentences had been marked as needing a citation for over 3 years, so I just pulled them out--it's one thing to say that people need time to find citations, but 3 years is plenty. I don't think saying that it is run by the committee, as it isn't really needed, nor is it completely clear from the websites you linked how the committee is organized and how much influence it has compared to the "volunteers." Unless reliable sources are available connecting the AOH, I think the sentences should stay out entirely. Qwyrxian (talk) 06:32, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Reply from Druweid, 14 January 2011

Fair enough. If I find any further information, I'll be sure to post it. Druweid (talk) 00:54, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from Patrixpax, 15 January 2011

{{edit semi-protected}}

Please change "Patricks day" to "Patrick's Day" as: 1. it is not the plural, but the possessive 2. Capital D for day as it is a special day.

Thank you, let all Wikipedians have a nice 2011! And Happy 10 Years celebration also!

Kind Regards, Patrick

Patrixpax (talk) 22:02, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done ThemFromSpace 23:44, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from MARKE405, 20 January 2011

{{edit semi-protected}} I would offer some additional information under the heading "Rugby Union" at the bottom of the page: "In England, London Irish RFC, who play in the Aviva Premiership competition, hold a St Patricks Day party on the occasion of their nearest home game to St Patricks Day. Live bands on an open-air stage, dancing and special guesta are accompanied by a sea of green and consumption of large amounts of Guinness." MARKE405 (talk) 23:02, 20 January 2011 (UTC) Not done:You've misunderstood the section's purpose--that section is about sporting events that are held on St. Patrick's day, not about St. Patrick's day celebrations conducted by sporting groups. Qwyrxian (talk)

St. Patrick's Day Parade in Boston in 1737?

I'm on the prowl for a primary or secondary reference that confirms that there was an actual St. Patrick's Day-themed parade in Boston in 1737. I've found unsourced references to this but nothing sources. I suspect that there may be some confusion across the spectrum with the founding of the Charitable Irish Society of Boston on March 17, 1737. I found this open reference on Google Scholar regarding this founding:

That book references another article that may hold another clue to this:

Sadly I don't have JSTOR access to research this article.

Another reference to the Society forming in 1737:

U.S. News references a parade in Boston in 1737, but for all I know the author was lazy and used the poorly-sourced Wikipedia reference:

I'm hoping someone with JSTOR access can peek at the article I referenced and see if it holds a clue. If we can't find a source for the 1737 Boston parade soon, I'll likely pull the sentence out and replace it with a reference to the first documented commemoration of St. Patrick in 1737.

Lostraven (talk) 00:03, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Incorrect Montreal, Canada Fact

It is stated that the Montreal, Canada parade is the longest running in North America. In fact, the longest running St. Patty's parade in North America is the New York City parade (also the longest in the world). It has been ongoing since 1762, while the Montreal parade has been since 1824(as stated in this article). It seems as though it is the longest in Canada, but not North America (which both Canada and USA are a part of). Please correct this! Stephinoz (talk) 08:00, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

St Patty's and "mostly" Irish

I reproduce my message on Eamonnca1's talk page below. It's more suited here, and follow up on Asarlaí's comment. I should have started this discussion here first!

Can you demonstrate what makes "St Patty's Day" an "error"? Fact is that it is a common enough name for the day in the US, and so is a perfectly acceptable alternative "nickname". It is not up to you to decide that, actually, all these people are in fact wrong. Please revert your change and I will provide cites to back up its use. Personally, I don't much like the term either, but neither you nor I are entitled to decide it's incorrect and shouldn't be there.

I also reverted your addition of "mostly" as I do not believe you can support this claim. Do you have cites that demonstrate that the majority of those who celebrate St Patrick's Day are Irish? Do they out-number the non-Irish? If you can not support this, then it is best to leave it undefined. Irish People are listed first, as clearly they originated the practice, but claims about who does it most are best avoided unless they can be cited. Thanks. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 20:18, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

Asarlaí suggests that is it obvious that "it's celebrated mostly by Irish people and people of Irish descent". Unfortunately, It didn't say "mostly by Irish people and people of Irish descent". It just said "Irish people". Besides that you'll find millions of people who are neither Irish or of Irish decent who celebrate it. Which of the two number more? I have no idea, but if you're going to claim one or the other it should be cited. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 14:47, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

I'll repost my argument here:
I think it's silly to say "Irish people, people of Irish ancestry, non-Irish celebrants". The main reason: it's just a long-winded way of saying "everyone"! It's obvious that St Patrick's Day is most popular in Ireland and wherever there are big populations of Irish descendants. The obvious conclusion is thus that it's celebrated "mostly by Irish people and people of Irish descent".
However, I agree it would be hard to find reliable sources to support that. I just thought I should "put it out there".
~Asarlaí 15:05, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

User:Keys767 has reverted again this change. Could I ask that they contribute first to this discussion, rather than reverting a change for which there is no consensus? Could I also specifically ask how a nickname is "incorrect"? Who decides? I added a cite there merely as an example of the name "St Patty's" in use. I could have added a dozen more, but didn't think that was appropriate. Yes, I know this is not a term used in Ireland, and not much liked there either. But this article is not St Patrick's Day in Ireland and must take a global view on the subject. If a sizeable number of American choose to call it "St Patty's", it is not Wikipedia's (or any editor of it) role to tell them they're wrong. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 16:50, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

Hello. I have reverted my edit to the article after being notified of the talk page discussion. Apologies. However, the reference given still does not constitute a citation. ☮KEYS767talk 16:52, 19 February 2011 (UTC)
EDIT: On this subject, perhaps we should add a note on the infobox that the "St Patty's Day" or "Patty's Day" version is widely used only in the US (is it used in Canada too?). My reasoning being that it is grouped with a list of terms that are widely used internationally. An isolated regional variation should surely be pointed out, as editors or visitors could easily see the US variation as an error. Just putting the suggestion out there. Example below:
nickname =
St Patrick's Day
St Paddy's Day
Patrick's Day
Paddy's Day
Patty's Day (US)
Thanks for reverting. What you suggest is a good idea. But can it be cited? I do know that St Patty's is common enough in the US (and examples can be cited) but how common, and how widespread I couldn't say. But the reason it's mentioned at all is because American editors have put it there. This is the challenge of adding increasing detail, if you don't get it right, others are within their rights to challenge and remove it. A lack of detail is better than incorrect detail. Maybe it's pretty common in Canada too? I don't know, so would be reluctant to label it "United States". --Escape Orbit (Talk) 11:30, 20 February 2011 (UTC)
How about:
Patty's Day (North America) or
Patty's Day (outside Ireland)
? ~Asarlaí 20:38, 24 February 2011 (UTC)
All perfectly reasonable if cited. All we have established so far is some Irish Wikipedia editors do not like the term "St Patty". That's not nearly enough to merit adding guesses (which is what it would amount to if not well sourced) about where it may, or may not, be in common use. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 21:21, 24 February 2011 (UTC)
I would be reluctant to agree with the "outside Ireland" one - I've never heard the term used outside North America and I think it would be easier to prove that "it is usually only used in X country", as opposed to being just outside Ireland. ☮KEYS767talk 21:27, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

I'd be okay with including "St Patty's Day" as long as it's clear that nobody in Ireland refers to it as such and is a predominantly North American term. --Eamonnca1 (talk) 22:04, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

But can you support either of these claims with a cite? I do not see any reason for adding them without one. As Keys says, it's possible to cite use in one or other country, but claims that it is never used in another is unlikely to be sourced reliably. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 17:46, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

I have included the note on the infobox for the time being on a de facto basis. My reasoning is:

a) We know that it is commonly called St Patty's in North America (I found Canadians using the term also)

b) We know that the term is not used in Ireland (but can't cite), as it's usually a short form of the name Patricia, not Patrick - and also that people from Ireland usually think the spelling is a mistake when they see it.

c) We know on a de facto basis that it is an Americanised term and we know that many other terms are "misspelled" during the transition into AmE. We know this through the clear difference seen in the media (a UK or Ireland news network using one term and a US or Canada network consistently using the other), and through Q&As with real people, such as seen on Yahoo!Answers [[1]] [[5]] (although Y!A is completely unsuitable as a cite)

d) Finally, the nature of the question makes it almost impossible to cite, since we would need to consecutively prove that it is not used in every other area other than North America. So an easier route would be to approach it from the opposite end (see below).

So, I propose instead that if anyone can cite that the infobox note is incorrect, then it should be immediately removed.

Also, this has been discussed before and it produced a consensus, although no changes were made.

⚡ KEYS767 ⚡ (talk) 14:40, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Poking about the internet to find examples of something to combine it with what we 'know', and then reaching a conclusion on it is original research, and may not demonstrate what you expect.
St Patty's in Australia. in Russia, New Zealand, Japan, Singapore, South Africa, United Kingdom, India. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 21:42, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from Elaine.gaughran, 13 March 2011

{{edit semi-protected}}

  1. Numbered list item

Please clarify that St. Patricks day is not abbreviated to Patty's day in Ireland. It is an incorrect abbreviation. Use as refrence

I notice previous discussions about this so perhaps a section on abbreviations explaing that the irish abbreviations come from the Irish language version of the name would help

Regards Elaine

Elaine.gaughran (talk) 11:40, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

X mark.svg Not done
I have been arguing this case fruitlessly elsewhere on the talk page. I'm afraid it's almost impossible to cite - and doesn't appear to be a reliable source for citation. The problem is that it is very difficult to prove that it is never used in a specific country or whether usage of a term is completely isolated to that country.
If I can find sources, I may possibly write a section on the article about this very "anti-Patty" argument, but for now it seems unlikely that this change can be made. ⚡ KEYS767 ⚡ (talk) 17:16, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
Good idea. If there are good sources discussing different naming of the day then it would be a good addition. It would have to remain neutral on the matter though.
As it is, I don't think the article every suggests that "Patty" is, or isn't, used in Ireland. What it does suggest that it used in some places. And it is used in some places so it is factually correct. The opinion of "Paddy Not Patty" does not negate this. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 20:53, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
Since this is currently under discussion, I'm untranscluding the edit request; please keep considering the issue, however. Qwyrxian (talk) 00:08, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

I've commented out the St Patty's section I wrote, because of how rubbish it looks with the tags, while I struggle to find citations. I may end up having to remove it completely if it turns out to be un-citable. I'll report back. ★KEYS★ (talk) 13:35, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for trying. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 17:11, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

Reference #34 is no longer available

Reference #34 is no longer available - the webpage has been discontinued. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mcadwell (talkcontribs) 17:08, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Temporary Semi-Protection of article

As you may know, St. Patrick's day is tomorrow (US/Canada Eastern Time), and the Google logo may decorate for St. Patrick's Day and it will link to St. Patrick's day as the link for Wikipeida article may be near the top, and that is an easy target for vandalism. I request for a temporary semi-protection of the article to prevent vandalism of the St. Patrick's day article. ELITE 3000 (talk) 01:37, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

Date in 2008

I find it odd that there are many erroneous references to St Patrick's Day being celebrated on the 15th. It was actually on the 14th, because St Joseph's Day also fell during Holy Week and was moved to the 15th, therefore causing St Patrick's Day to be moved to the 14th. FlyingOtter (talk)

Was St. Patrick responsible for Religious suppression and murder?

Why doesn't Wikipedia mention any of that, you won't find any Druids celebrating his day... 

I would love to know more, anybody anybody?

The following is from The Druids were not interested in giving up their old ways and converting to Christianity. St. Patrick is said to have lead to the murders of almost eight hundred Druid priests and priestesses. As he would walk by a Druid who would not convert, he would stamp his staff and walk away. His flowers would then attack and kill the nonbeliever. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 08:30, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

If you can find a better source than a blog, you could propose adding something to the article. HiLo48 (talk) 08:53, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

First of all, the Druids were in decline long before Saint Patrick came along (around the time of Julius Caesar), and considering basically nothing is known about them (despite Neo-Pagan claims), we can't even be sure whether they were religious leaders, political leaders, philosophers or hermits. So no, there's no more Druids around to celebrate St. Patrick's Day, but that's hardly any evidence of religious persecution and mass murder.
In Patrick's writings (Letter to the Soldiers of Coroticus & his Declaration) he decried such violence, and those describing him ordering his followers (I assume he wasn't assassinating Druids with daisies) to kill Druids, concede that the events may have involved 4 different people called Patrick.
Given all that, I'd say there's a pretty high standard of proof to call St Patrick a persecutor and murderer. It can be done, to be sure, but you'd need reputable sources, and even then it would go in Saint Patrick's page, not on the Saint Patrick's Day page. The Cap'n (talk) 16:19, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

  • Agree with Askahrc. Well sourced information might belong in the St. Patrick article or history of Ireland, but is not relevant to an overview of Saint Patrick's Day celebrations. -- Infrogmation (talk) 16:52, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from Clowwwn, 17 March 2011

{{edit semi-protected}}

Please change the following copy:

"The day is generally characterised by the attendance of church services,[3][4] wearing of green attire (especially shamrocks),[5] and the lifting of Lenten restrictions on fasting and drinking,[6][7][8] which is often proscribed during the rest of the season.[9][10][11][12]"


"The day is generally characterised by the attendance of church services,[3][4] wearing of green attire (especially shamrocks),[5] and the lifting of Lenten restrictions on eating and drinking,[6][7][8] which is often proscribed during the rest of the season.[9][10][11][12]"

It does not make sense to say "the lifting of Lenten restrictions on fasting..." as fasting is the restriction--rather it should say "lifting of Lenten restriction on eating and drinking..."

Clowwwn (talk) 21:41, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done OhNoitsJamie Talk 21:56, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

Proposed Split: 'St. Patrick's Day in the United States'

<< BEGIN QUOTE from archived discussion: >>

I find it difficult to believe how an article on the feast day of the patron saint of the Republic of Ireland needs this much emphasis on the US perspective; it seems that everyone from the US has added their view on how their own town or city celebrates the day.

I can understand putting in specifics about the New York, Boston and perhaps Chicago celebrations as they are either significant due to the irish decendent populations in these cities or they are noteworthy for the way the day is celebrated (e.g. dying the Chicago river green) but can we really justify including the likes of Tallahassee etc?

Basically what I'm proposing here is to cut back the US section of the article and extend the Ireland section possibly splitting up into the two seperate countries; Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland.

I realise this kind of goes againtst WP:BB but we're talking about different cultures here so I'd rather get a discussion going involving the people from those cultures first.--Connelly90[AlbaGuBràth] (talk) 14:05, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

I agree completely that the USA is currently "overrepresented" by comparison to coverage of elsewhere. However I think this is due more to not enough info and media relating to Ireland and other places rather than "too much" about the USA. So I'd encourage adding material, but am less enthusiastic about making major cut backs of sections where we do have detailed info. We can spin off a seperate article "St. Patrick's Day in the United States" or something similar if the section gets overly long. -- Infrogmation (talk) 19:25, 11 January 2011 (UTC)
I think that adding a seperate article about "St. Patrick's Day in the United States" would add to the problem and encourage more people to extend the article by unnessiceraly adding their town's own celebrations, however unremarkable they may be. I agree that it would be better to extend the section on Ireland rather than remove parts from the section about the United States; but, do we really need a description of how the day is celebrated in places like Tallahassee? especially since it sounds like such a standerd celebration and there is nothing really notable about it (e.g. dying rivers green)--Connelly90[AlbaGuBràth] (talk) 11:14, 13 January 2011 (UTC)


I agree with the proposale split into a new article. --armoreno10 18:38, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

I also think this is a good idea. (talk) 00:39, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

I've merged these two sections and provided a previous quote for reference, since I think this should be discussed in more depth so that we can get rid of that Split template. (Personally, I would also be in agreement to split the US section into a new article.) ★KEYS★ (talk) 19:28, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
Disagree with proposal. The US is over-represented, but this is more a reason to add international balance, and cut back on the more minor stuff. For instance, is it the job of this article to list the detail every town's parade? Would these not be better in List of St Patrick Day Parades (covering all countries)? This article can then concentrate on describing typical features of the day in each countries, without getting bogged down in detail on what happens in every town.
But I don't see a just cause for splitting the article on national lines, as it is essentially the same holiday/festival/religious event in all countries. Splitting would be suggesting that it is somehow different in the United States, and has just a hint of WP:POVFORK about it. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 21:04, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
Disagree - As I've said in the archived discussion above, giving the Celebrations in the US a dedicated article puts far too much emphasis on the St. Patrick's day celebrations in the US. In my opinion, this article needs massive revisions in order to point the emphasis away from the very heavy undue emphasis on the US to focus on the country and the people from which the celebrated culture originates; Ireland and the Irish:-
  • Change the picture in the infobox from the Chicago river to one that shows Irish celebrations.
  • Cut back heavily on the mentions of celebrations from minor towns and cities in the US, especially if they are not really notable for doing anything out of the ordinary or extravagant. I suggest only including New York City, Boston and Chigago.
  • Extending the "In Ireland" section posibly to the level of detail shown in the US section now
Sorry if i seem a little aggressive, but I feel quite strongly about this.--Connelly90[AlbaGuBràth] (talk) 13:52, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
Agree with the split wrt WP:DUE and WP:SIZE. Some users feel the article might be too US heavy with content. Giving that content its own article might mitigate that problem.
Also Connelly90, until a consensus is reached regarding how to handle the US section of the article, please refrain from removing legitimate sourced content. While there is nothing wrong with your opinion, it is just that, an opinion. Your edits removed some well sourced content of notable regional celebrations. -Deathsythe (talk) 15:54, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
Fair point, I've added [citation needed] tags to the sections that had no citation but I've changed the picture back to St. Patrick as I feel it is infinatly more relevant than the picture of the Chigago river.--Connelly90[AlbaGuBràth] (talk) 19:37, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
No argument here. :) I took the liberty to add it back into the article in the section about Chicago though. -Deathsythe (talk) 20:05, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
  • A split has been performed although I don't see a clear consensus for doing so. The new article is here.
    ⋙–Berean–Hunter—► 16:45, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

Edit request from, 18 March 2011

{{edit semi-protected}}

Under United States celebrations, it has a sub-heading for Chicago, IL. It spells the word "dyeing" as "dying". (talk) 01:54, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Done and thanks. Bjmullan (talk) 04:22, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

i need the countries that celebrate saint patricks day!! (all of them:))

I really need some help! I need the countries of which Saint Patricks Day is celebrated! Im really Irish i know most of them but i just cant figure out them all! — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 20:10, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

pretty much every country on this list --> --Connelly90[AlbaGuBràth] (talk) 08:46, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

Wearing Orange, again

On what basis are we deleting the pertinent and sourced information regarding moves to wear orange on St. Patrick's Day? --YHoshua (talk) 21:56, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

Perhaps you have forgotten? This is identical to what was discussed and deleted nearly 3 years ago. And then again two years ago. And nothing has changed. It is still sourced to YHoshua's own wordpress blog website and a letter to a provincial newspaper written by YHoshua. Much of the rest of what is written is factually correct, but irrelevant to Saint Patrick's Day, or unsourced speculation. What's more, since the last time, even cite on his blog appears to have gone. The reasons why this isn't going in are still the same; not notable, undue emphasis, poorly sourced, irrelevant and speculation.
I invite YHoshua to either produce better cites from reliable sources, or do not re-add again what was removed by consensus some while ago. Thanks. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 22:03, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
Nice catch Escape Orbit for those of us with gold fish brains! Bjmullan (talk) 22:13, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

No reference to the fact that this is a bastardized festival ?

That it's present day prominence is solely due to marketing by the Brewing Industry, and has nothing to do with St Patrick, just with getting people to spend much money on alcohol as possible. That SPD is marketed as being 'cool' just makes me laugh. People are so gullible. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 11:57, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Has this perspective been reported in a reliable source? (That's what we need here.) HiLo48 (talk) 21:11, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
Much as I agree with what you say, it needs a reliable source if we're going to include that view in the article. --Eamonnca1 (talk) 22:30, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
Agree also. It's a joke the way the entire "festival" revolves around the drug that is alcohol. (talk) 03:29, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

Depends on the country. In Ireland many people still observe the religious aspect and its more of a day to celebrate Irish culture without being labelled as a nationalist Eggilicious (talk) 09:35, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

I understand that the Pagan religion barely has a voice anymore, but in the name of unbiased information, shouldn't we include the whole part about mass conversion by force/torture? That may be relevant. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 13:25, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

What conversion by torture? The conversion to Christianity was not by coercion — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eggilicious (talkcontribs) 10:29, 18 March 2012 (UTC)


Neither the Catholic Church nor the Irish community, the fifth largest in the world outside Ireland, take part in the organisation of the parties.

I cannot work out what this is trying to say. The Argentinian Irish community, apparently one of the larger Irish communities outside Ireland, NOT taking part in St Patrick's Day celebrations - that sounds extremely wrong. Can someone clarify? -- Jack of Oz [your turn] 21:44, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

oi meu nome eh eu eu queria falar a vcs que eu sou legal e o patrick tamem —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 18:27, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

To clarify,this celebrations in Argentina are a relatively recent occurance. Irish style pubs were not common until about 15-20 years ago and these celebrations are a fashion introduced to copy American style, just as Valentine's day has been introduced in recent years. There is no cultural tradition for these, they are rather marketing campaigns. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 02:01, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

References in the lead

Is it really necessary for there to be so many references in the lede? Surely these reference can be moved to the article body and make the lede easier to read? Bjmullan (talk) 21:41, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

It also states that his father and grandfather were in the Church in Ireland when it was either Western Britain or Brittany. (talk) 03:42, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

St Patty

It appears we are going to go through again the dispute regarding use of "St Patty's Day". We've discussed this before. Bottom line is that a significant number of people use this term and it is not Wikipedia's mission to tell them they are wrong. Wikipedia documents what is, not what some people think should be. Some people don't like it and think it's an error, in which case, if this opinion can be cited from reliable sources, it may be included in the article. But there are no grounds for removing the term from the article just because you don't care for it. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 18:17, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Earth Orbit, I'm sorry but you don't know who it is you're talking about. The "some people who don't like it" are the people who ACTUALLY LIVE IN IRELAND (myself included). The "significant number of people who use this term" are people who actually don't. Ireland may be a small country but I really don't think this is an issue that requires a "1-person, 1-vote" rule, do you? It's Ireland's day, the Irish people don't like it, it shouldn't be included under "Also called", end of discussion. If you need verifiable data for this, I cannot provide it, but I do have over 5,000 twitter followers (over 3 accounts) the vast majority of which live in Ireland and there actually exists a hashtag #paddynotpatty which you may want to look into. Besides, in turn I would challenge you to provide data for the "some people" and "significant number of people" that you mention. Now I'd be all for a section referring to the discussion, but given the passion with which the name is reviled to have it where it is on the Wikipedia entry is nothing short of ignorant. JLPagano (talk) 06:28, 17 March 2012 (UTC)
Let's settle this. Can we please provide references from reliable sources (here) to show usage of the various names. Is St. Patty's day mostly a USA usage? A section on the name would be a useful addition to the article. For now, I've added (Mostly USA) to the St. Patty entry (as per previous discussions) although I'd like to see references quantifying usage in USA. If editors want to add that one name is "wrong" or "incorrect", let's see the sources. --HighKing (talk) 12:09, 17 March 2012 (UTC)
See previous discussion on this. Deciding it is "mainly USA" without a cite saying so is original research. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 17:37, 17 March 2012 (UTC)
This article is not Saint Patrick's Day in Ireland. Like all Wikipedia articles it strives to present a global perspective. Regardless of how the term is regraded within Ireland, St Patrick's Day is known as "St Patty's Day" by plenty of people globally. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 17:37, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

Looking at the Irish Times (The paper of record) online archive from 1996 there's 169 references to "Paddy's Day", while for "St Patty's" there's three, one of which isn't referring to the day, and the other two which appear to be from American correspondents. There's no doubt in anyone's minds in this country (the actual origin of the day) that "St Patty's" is not correct. The name is only a bastardisation of "Paddy's Day" by people who can't grasp the word, and Wikipedia should not be perpetuating this nonsense. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dennycrane101 (talkcontribs) 13:20, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

It may not have originally been correct, but language evolves. A good number of examples from reputable news sources have popped up today using "St. Patty's Day":
  • CNBC: "$94,000 Scotch? Why Not, It's St. Patty's Day" [6]
  • CBS News: "THE Dish: Darina Allen's St. Patty's Day stew" [7]
  • USA Today: "...the perfect tech tools to celebrate St. Patty's Day in style." [8]
  • "Your 2012 guide to St. Patty’s day events, parties and parades." [9]
  • "St. Patty's Day Party Spots That'll Shake Your Shamrocks" [10]
It appears that "St. Patty's Day" appears primarily in US media, and fairly often. It undoubtedly refers to the holiday with the full title "Saint Patrick's Day," so it makes sense to recognize the shortened version "St. Patty's Day." --PicklePower (talk) 15:14, 17 March 2012 (UTC)
I wonder what people had to say about "Pádraig" becoming "Patrick"?? Words change. Ds can become Ts. That's it way it goes. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 17:40, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

So basically we're taking Escape Orbit's logic over an entire nation? If we start calling you escape hatch does your name change to that? It's not St Patricia's day, and it has nothing to do with burgers. It's Paddy's Day. At least with the "mainly USA" edit the page can acknowledge that it's only clueless American's that call the day that.

No, basically we are taking Wikipedia policy over the personal opinions of some readers. The info box is listing names by which the day is known. Clearly many call it "Patty", or we wouldn't even be having this discussion. Whether this diminutive is "incorrect" or not is an entirely different matter. If you have any reliable sources that discuss the disputed shortening of the name, then it could perhaps be in the article further down. But there is absolutely no justification for removing what is there and what is accurate just because you don't like it.--Escape Orbit (Talk) 10:08, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

Mexico Also Celebrates

Article fails to mention that Mexico also celebrates the feast day. It is because of the contributions of the San Patricios in the Mexican-American War. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 19:17, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

Move protected but not semiprotected?

The article is not semiprotected but it is moveprotected. Was the semiprotection been just lifted or was never implemented? ELITE 3000 (talk) 00:55, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

It is semi-protected, until March 22. See here. — FoxCE (talkcontribs) 01:01, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 17 March 2012

Please remove - (St.) Patty's Day (Mainly USA)

The reference of Patty should not be acknowledged as it is an insult. Paddy is derived from the Irish, Pádraig, being a male name - 'Patty' is a type of burger and can also be a nickname for Patricia, although rare in itself. To refer to a male St. as a female nickname is just in no way appropriate and should not be recognised on such a page. (talk) 15:12, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

Not done: We don't censor information in Wikipedia. Thanks, Celestra (talk) 17:15, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

Celestra, in fairness, "Patty" is a misspelling of "Paddy". The reason the misspelling exists is that intervocalic -t- and -d- sound alike in most varieties of North American English. But it's still a spelling error, just as "Krissmas" is. We need not "censor" the fact that this misspelling exists, but it does not belong in the infobox. "Paddy" is short for "Pádraig" or "Patrick"; "Patty" is only sort for "Patricia". I am going to remove this from the infobox, and refer to "Patty" elsewhere. And I don't expect to be overruled. Fair enough? -- Evertype· 17:45, 17 March 2012 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Done I have made this edit by adding a sentence to the lead, and putting in a footnote about the misspelling. Are further references required? If so, please discuss them here and please do not revert the changes made. -- Evertype· 17:58, 17 March 2012 (UTC)
X mark.svg Not doneI have just reverted. See the section above for discussion already on this. Please do not change until there is a consensus to do so. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 19:10, 17 March 2012 (UTC)
Evertype, it may well be that St. Patty originated as a misspelling of St. Paddy, or it may have just have started as a familiar form of Patrick; I wouldn't know, I'm not an etymologist. Today, though, it is well known variation and removing it because someone is offended would be censorship. Thanks, Celestra (talk) 20:21, 17 March 2012 (UTC)
Escape Orbit: From my point of view here, you pretty much seem to be the only person on that side of the "consensus" discussion... I see a far greater consensus to remove it...
Celestra: I'd hardly say that one country in the world referring to it differently incorrectly is "well known". TheChrisD RantsEdits 20:32, 17 March 2012 (UTC)
Well I can see at least three others. And fortunately I also have Wikipedia policy on my side. Discussion about how "St Patty" arose, and how it is an error, and how it is "just" Americans, has so far been either pure speculation, questionable original research or just plain personal opinion. Those of this viewpoint would be far better starting with a cite to a reliable source. Where is one? --Escape Orbit (Talk) 22:53, 17 March 2012 (UTC)
St. Patty, based on the rather obvious views on Twitter, seems to stem as nearly all Americans are of the viewpoint that because his name was Patrick that the day is shortened to Patty. The problem lies in the fact that they are going by the Anglicised version of the name (Patrick), whereas back in those times he would have been known as Padraic (or a similar timely derivative). If you notice that article would will see that it mentions the source of name being Saint Patrick himself. The name is kept in Irish heritage with several people who specifically go under the name Pádraig (Pádraig Harrington being the most globally well-known example), as well as the Fitzpatrick surname, again, the English version of Mac Giolla Phádraig. As well as that, in the past the term "Paddy" was used as a derogatory term for Irish people, which bled through to the holiday itself as this is seen as an Irish holiday. I can very confidently say that it is a US only thing as I have not seen any Canadians spelling it with double-T, rather I have only ever seen double-D's. If you'd like a source, I'd start with a recent article by John McIntyre of the Baltimore Sun, who has himself being attempting to educate people as to the proper spelling of the shortened name, by teaching them of the name's history. TheChrisD RantsEdits 23:46, 17 March 2012 (UTC)
Your original research on Twitter and personal opinion on how it arose is noted but, as I said, irrelevant. If you read previous discussions on this you'll see it is not just Americans.
Thank you for the cite, it helps demonstrate that many people say "Patty", and therefore the article is entirely correct in listing it. Whether "Patty" is "incorrect" or not is an entirely different matter. If you believe that you can provide sufficient reliable sources and the dispute is notable enough (something I'm unconvinced about), then perhaps you may think about adding a section on it further down the article. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 10:01, 18 March 2012 (UTC)
If you read it better, you will note that the source indicates the history of the name and how Americans choose to use an incorrect name. This at least is viable enough to keep the "mainly US/North America" or equivalent tag to Patty in the infobox, as it shows that mainly Americans utilise it. Your previous Google searches are not mainstream enough, particularly if you were to compare to the results for Paddy. Also, per the editor in the section above, I too am concerned that you are still the only person on the other side of consensus to keep the mention or to keep it without any localisation note, considering that each year since 2010, you are the only editor reverting any changes made, which seems to indicate that you are trying to take ownership, and that consensus is on the other side. Also, per last year's archived discussion, Keys' statements still lie true. As such, if you can prove diminutively via a reliable source that indicates that regions other than the US (or North America) use Patty's often and in the mainstream media (not occasional use), then not having an area note in the infobox would be fine. In this case, I would encourage you to ignore all rules given that this is not a bureaucracy. TheChrisD RantsEdits 13:49, 18 March 2012 (UTC)
Your interpretation of your own source is flawed. No-where does John E. McIntyre state anyone is "incorrect". Nor does he make any kind of analysis of where mainly it is known as "Patty". All he says is that in Ireland the Saint would have been known as Paddy, but many Americans choose to call their day "St Patty's". Frankly, I can't see what is there is to get worked up about on either side. No-one is being forced to use anyone else's terminology. If, and when, we have reliably sourced information about who/where uses what then it would be great to have that in the article. But until then, far too much of this discussion is tied up in trying to demonstrate who is "correct" and who is "incorrect" when there is no such thing. And even if one or other spelling was inconclusively show to be an error it still wouldn't matter. Fact is that many know their Saint Patrick's Day as "St Patty's", and it is not up to Wikipedia to decide they are wrong and tell them to stop it. All Wikipedia can do is, if it is notable, neutrally report the dispute. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 17:36, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────You know, a lot of people write "Xmas" and even say [ˈɛksməs] but we don't have that spelling in the Infobox for Christmas, do we? EscapeOrbit's reversion of carefully-written text, designed to keep a reference to the misspelling "Patty" in the article, but to remove it from the infobox where it simply doesn't belong. In any variety of English, "Patty" is a girl's name, and "Paddy" is a boy's name. In North America, "Patricia" is shortened to "Patty". "Patrick" is shortened to "Pat". TheChrisD's suggestion that Americans shorten "Patrick" to "Patty" is an example "original research". That is what we linguists call "folk etymology". Now on the other hand it is a matter of fact that for most speakers in North America both "Paddy" and "Patty" are pronounced [ˈpæɾi] with a flap. This is not "original research", by the way. It is phonetic transcription. And a link was given to the page on North American English. And that explains the spelling error. I don't believe that TheChrisD EscapeOrbit should have reverted the changes I made without discussion, particularly as I requested that the text be let stand so that people could evaluate it. The dispute can and should be noted in the article, but the misspelling does not belong in the infobox. -- Evertype· 17:42, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

Evertype: If you notice the edit I made, it was simply to restore your Irish translation fix that Escape Orbit reverted when they undid your edit. Please rescind your comments. TheChrisD RantsEdits 17:53, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

(edit conflict):So now, I have restored the sentence in the lead referring to the varieties of names for the day, and expanded the footnote about "Patty" to include a reference to intervocalic alveolar-flapping. So here, Celestra, you will note that the "variant" is discussed. It has not been removed. The dispute now is "does it belong in the infobox" and I suggest that it really does not, any more than "Xmas" belongs in the infobox for Christmas. ("Xmas" is referred to in the article.) Your concern was about censorship: we're not censoring, but I am an etymologist, and I assure you that the only reason for the misspelling is phonological. There is no orthographic precedent for writing "Patty" for any form of "Patrick", saint or otherwise: That spelling is a regular shortening of "Patricia". -- Evertype· 17:56, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

As long as the footnote and note that the use of "Patty" is erroneous remain, I have no problem with it remaining in the infobox. Regarding Escape Orbit's but many Americans choose to call their day "St Patty's", I would like to point out that there is a separate article for St. Patrick's Day in the United States, so ultimately I would like to see the use of "Patty's" limited to that article (if used at all) given its national focus. The main reason editors on both sides get worked up over this is: Irish people find the use of Patty's to be an insult to our patron saint and national holiday; Americans don't comprehend that Paddy stems from Pádraig - as such their "militant ignorance is on wide display" (as said by John McIntyre). TheChrisD RantsEdits 18:12, 18 March 2012 (UTC)
And again I have removed it. Please stop adding disputed content while discussions are on-going. As I have already pointed out, your opinion of what is erroneous is not suitable content. Your guesswork at why Americans refer to "Patty" is not a cite, by any stretch of the imagination. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 18:27, 18 March 2012 (UTC)
Who appointed you owner of this article, EscapeOrbit? I hear only one person here insisting that "Patty" must remain in the infobox, and that's you. "Patty" is short for "Patricia". Patty Smith. Peppermint Patty. Short forms of "Patrick" are "Pat" and "Paddy". That's not an opinion: it is knowing how to spell. Intervocalic alveolar-flapping in North American English explains the spelling error. Again this is not "guesswork". It is linguistics. What is so difficult about this? Consensus does not mean unanimity, and in this case you seem to be on the opposite side of the consensus. And please note that "cite" is a verb, not a noun. The word you are looking for is "citation". -- Evertype· 19:04, 18 March 2012 (UTC)
I will ask you for the last time Escape Orbit, did you even read the article? It's plainly obvious that the entire second paragraph deals with his name, and explains the source and how it evolved from old English to current Irish. I am also concerned that another editor has brought up the topic of article ownership which you appear to have displayed consistently over the past three holidays reverting a slew of editors, despite several of those offering links and potential resolutions. TheChrisD RantsEdits 22:56, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────The status quo is not acceptable. I propose to restore my main sentence to the lead. Now, would anyone like to discuss editiing that text? Reverting to the status quo is not on, EscapeOrbit. Do you have something constructive to offer? -- Evertype· 19:16, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

I have repeatedly offered constructive solutions. If you have a citation from a reliable source that discusses why "Patty" is wrong, or offers commentary on the whole "Paddy" vs "Patty" dispute, then I am perfectly happy for it to be included at a suitable place in the article. (I do not think the lead and the info box is the place for this side issue.) What is not a solution is unsourced speculation about how and why "Patty" is used, and a Wikipedia editor deciding that "Patty" is incorrect and everyone who uses it is wrong. If we go down that route then why stop there? Why is Patrick ok, when it should be Padraig? Language develops, use changes. How "Patty" may be used elsewhere is irrelevant, the plain fact is that a significant number of people deliberately use "Patty" to describe Saint Patrick's Day. That is fact. It may have originally arisen from a mistake, it may not have. It may even annoy a significant number of other people to distraction. But it is still a fact and Wikipedia should reflect that. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and this article documents the global celebration of this Saint's day, it is not a rule book that dictates to people where they're getting it wrong.
If you can't provide sources, then you could perhaps take the matter to request for comment. You may have more success there explaining why Wikipedia should be policing how this cultural celebration is named, and why your unsourced analysis of how it arose is ok as a citation. I always try to be pragmatic about disputes like this and am not going to stand in the way of clear consensus. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 22:31, 18 March 2012 (UTC)
as an interested, non-Irish, non-American observer of this discussion (I'm Welsh - so don't ever mention Saint Davey's day!), I'm trying to view this from a Wikipedia/encyclopedia perspective. For me, the fact that many Americans and reputable American sources use "Patty" is enough for it to be in the article. Yes, it may well be "incorrect" but Wikipedia is not here to be a guardian of the truth - it is here for fact, and it is a fact that many people use the term. I think we could be looking at using phrases like "sometimes colloquially known as", or "sometimes informally known as ... in the US". Maybe we get it out of the info box but included early in the lead using a phrase similar to those I've suggested?Ytic nam (talk) 22:39, 18 March 2012 (UTC)
Ytic nam, that is exactly what Evertype has attempted to implement on two occasions, both time which has been reverted by Escape Orbit. While myself and Evertype are of the mindset that the usage of Patty's is incorrect, I acknowledge that it is used by a significant number of people in the United States and that a note stating that the spelling is limited to such an area is a perfectly reasonable action considering how this article is to remain global. I may have to see about bringing up this discussion within MOS:IE... TheChrisD RantsEdits 22:56, 18 March 2012 (UTC)
The usage in the US is incorrect. There are two possible theses: One is that Americans innovated a shortened version of "Patrick" which happens to look just like the usual short form for the woman's name "Patricia". I don't believe that this argument is either plausible or sustainable. The other is that some Americans ignorant of Ireland heard Irish people saying "Paddy's Day" and parsed it incorrectly as "Patty" because the words patty and paddy are perfect rhymes in American English. That they do rhyme is a fact, and I have pointed to an article which explains the falling-together of the two sounds. So even if "Patty's Day" has any currency in the US, it is nevertheless a mistake (no matter how many people make it), and the encyclopaedia should not treated as though it were in any way accurate. There are, in fact, no arguments (or verifiable facts) that show that "Patty" has any origin other than that of a mis-hearing and misspelling of "Paddy". I have written text which explains this, but EscapeOrbit has not provided any constructive editorial contributions. Rather, he has reverted twice, without sufficient argument, and he has chanted the usual "Wikipedia Rules" argument, when of course all such "rules" are "guidelines", and we are expected to use our intelligence as editors." -- Evertype· 23:25, 18 March 2012 (UTC)


Guys. Things are getting a little heated here and that's not helping anyone. Can I again suggest that you raise the matter at request for comment? Otherwise, please see my summary below. I believe I've said all this before, but perhaps not clearly enough.

  • Evertype thesis on the origins of "St Patty's Day" is interesting, and perhaps even correct. However Wikipedia is clear that what it contains should be verifiable, not "the truth". All that is needed for his idea about Intervocalic alveolar-flapping is for it to be reliably sourced. It's that straight forward. Otherwise how is anyone to know it's not just a plausible sounding guess?
  • Whether this idea is true or not, it makes no difference to whether "Patty" should be included in the article or not. A large number of people write it as this, therefore Wikipedia should include it.
  • It makes absolutely no difference how "Patty's Day" came about, and the history of Pádraig only demonstrates that names sometimes change as they are passed along. All that matters is that "Patty's Day" has come into use, and therefore Wikipedia should include it.
  • Discussion about whether it is incorrect or not is pointless without a reliably sourced citation that says specifically this. We, as Wikipedia editors, do not get to decide or extrapolate from the cites.
  • Labelling "St Patty's Day" as American is fine by me, if cited. There are examples of it being used outside of America so I cannot say for sure it is mostly restricted to there, and nor can anyone else. This is why we rely on good cites to tell us.
  • I do not believe any of this side-show is significant enough for it to be crowding the lead or the info box.
  • I am aware that many don't like the term "St Patty's Day", and that may be particularly among the Irish. But, like it or not, this article reflects a global cultural celebration.
  • I do not believe I own the article. (and TheChrisD is the only one to suggest I do). I believe that I am trying to maintain the quality of the article by applying Wikipedia policy to what is added to it. That means no original research or removing things simply because it annoys some people's idea of the truth. It is this that has been attempted each year around this time. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 02:16, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Sorry for joining this one late. I dont like it being called St. Patty's Day, but that has sod all to do with whether I can remove it. WP:CENSOR and WP:IDONTLIKE play a big part here. I have stated my personal opinion here but that has nothing to do with wiki or the benefit of the project. Patty stays even if we dont like it or agree with its usage. It is used and has been shown to still be used. Murry1975 (talk) 10:03, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────To EscapeOrbit

  • I am a native speaker of American English and a trained linguist. Both paddy and patty are pronounced as perfect rhymes in General American. This can be transcribed as [ˈpæɾi]. Are you saying that you want this "proved" somehow? This encyclopaedia has an article about Intervocalic alveolar-flapping. It clearly explains that -dd- and -tt- fall together in American English. "Intervocalic alveolar-flapping is a phonological process found in many dialects of English, especially North American English and Australian English, by which either or both prevocalic (preceding a vowel) /t/ and /d/ surface as the alveolar tap [ɾ] after sonorants other than /ŋ/, /m/, and (in some environments) /l/." Now, are you saying that the article on flapping is in error? If it is not in error, than it does not take a PhD in linguistics to know that paddy and patty rhyme. You only have to use your bloody ears. The words rhyme. Since for Americans they rhyme, it is not surprising that in the absence of a proper education, they might mis-hear "Paddy" as "Patty" and misspell the word. That's called folk etymology. If you think that there is some article out there that discusses this particular word then you are quite probably mistaken. If you think that the "rules" of the Wikipedia prohibit our putting this material into the article in the absence of such an article, you are quite certainly mistaken. It is not "a plausible guess". It is an analysis of a spelling error on the basis of the phonology of the people who make the spelling error. One does not find the spelling error in other places where this phonological feature does not occur. This is common knowledge.
  • You have consistently failed to provide any other explanation (plausible or not) for the use of the misspelling "Patty" or responded to the fact that the spelling "Patty" is used as a short form of "Patricia", not of "Patrick" in standard English orthography worldwide.
  • You try to make yourself sound conciliatory but in fact you have reverted twice a decently well-written sentence added to the lead which simply lists the majority spellings and gives a footnote with internal links about the misspelling. That preserves all of the information in the article for its readers, and also reduces the visibility of the offensive misspelling.
  • I also think that your un-expert obstructionism is an example of your trying to own the article. You have not discussed the argument. You have retreated to citing your interpretation of "the rules" about "verifiability". Once again, the phonology of the people who make the misspelling is easily verifiable if one simply uses one's ears.
  • I am going to restore the sentence. If you revert it, I will report you for having broken the three-times reversion rule, and you can very likely expect a ban of a week or two. If you do not like the sentence and footnote, your only proper recourse shall be to discuss the wording of the sentence and footnote on the Talk Page. Because in my judgement, you are the only person trying to obstruct this change to the article, and your claims about verifiability and reliability are not sufficient.

To Murry1975: Nobody is trying to "censor" anything. But there is an actual context for the misspelling (which is a misspelling), which is easy to understand in its context, and useful to readers of the encyclopaedia. Even EscapeOrbit is now agreeing that "Patty" does not belong in the infobox. (So he should not object to my deleting it from there.) Regarding the prominence of the misspelling in the article, I recommend that it be relegated to a footnote. I'm going to put it there in my next edit of the article. If you think that it belongs elsewhere, perhaps you would agree to discuss this here on this Talk Page. Thank you for your consideration. -- Evertype· 10:23, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

There are newspapers listed above, they are RS. Is adding "In North America the misspelling Patty for Paddy is sometimes encountered, but the misspelling is due to the fact that intervocalic -tt- and --dd- sound alike in most North American varieties of English, due to a tendency to intervocalic alveolar-flapping" as a reference anyway to add to an encyclopaedia? Whether or not it is a mispelling it has become common and there is nothing adding your own comment to will undo these. Paddy is short for Patrick which as a saint the venurable name should be used so to say Paddy in itself is is wrong by convention. Add to the fact that his name could have been anything from Páríc to Cothraige and calling him Patrick might also be a misspelling or wrong translation would you advocaat the use of the Latin name, one of the few third party references to him that is found "Patricius" which oddly enough if shorten would be Patty!! Keep the OR out of the article please. I dont like Patty but I have seen it enough times to know its a common reference name. Murry1975 (talk) 11:16, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
Yes, but Murry, I presume that you've seen it enough times in American media? TheChrisD RantsEdits 12:11, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
Indeed mainly in American or Canadian media. Is there a reason that we can exclude these sources? Under WP:CENSOR, no we cant. We cant ignore what the largest nation that speaks English as a first language call it whether we like it or not. It is easily sourced, as it has been above as St. Patty's Day. What seems to be the underlining problem is that it considered a difference in spoken language that has given this rise of a "mistake". I dont like Patty but we cant just remove it and try to side step the fact. Adding OR as has been done to lessen the relevance of Patty is not helping the project.Murry1975 (talk) 12:21, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────I think it shows extraordinary bad faith and incivility for Murray1975 to have reverted the text of the article in light of the SPECIFIC REQUEST (made more than once) that people not do so, but rather to wordsmith and discuss the matter on the Talk Page. The identification of "Patty" as a misspelling for "Paddy" is not "original research". It is knowing how to spell. "Patty" is a girl's name. St Patrick was not a girl. The spelling "Patty" arises from ignorance on the part of people who don't know how to spell the name correctly. The reason for the error is that in their dialect the two words are perfect rhymes. That is also not "original research". It is not the job of an encyclopaedia to just list every existing spelling "neutrally" when in fact one of them is an error, and indeed an error which causes some offence to the people whose national holiday and patron saint it is. Give me a break. Moreover, you have not demonstrated that the entirety of the "largest nation that speaks English" all use the misspelling "Patty". In point of fact most people do not. By the way, I would like to point out that "can't" is spelt with an apostrophe in English. Further, you have not understood the argument. "Patty" and "Paddy" are pronounced EXACTLY ALIKE in American English, which is why there is a spelling error. People heard "Paddy" [ˈpæɾi] but did not know how to spell it, and wrote "Patty" by mistake. We have not "removed" Patty: we have kept it in the article, but put it in the proper place. Americans should spell the word "Paddy" and that spelling is widespread. A minority misspell the name as "Patty" and that misspelling does not constitute an official or formal name in the United States. It is a mistake and that fact should be pointed out. That is not censorship. It is good encyclopaedic editing. -- Evertype· 13:31, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

I have invited members of WikiProject Ireland to attend to this discussion. -- Evertype· 13:41, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
You seem to misunderstand how Wikipedia works, Evertype. It does not work like "I insert something uncited, ask no-one to touch it, and then we discuss it". That is the precise opposite of how it works. If you are adding something and it is challenged and removed, particularly because it has no source, then the onus is on you to convince others that it should be there, and then it gets added. See guidelines here.
I'm afraid that your stated position as a "native speaker of American English and a trained linguist" simply confirms what I've been saying. Your personal experience and expertise carry absolutely no weight. You, like I, are just another Wikipedia editor with no verifiable qualifications. This is why we depend on sourcing and citing content. You do not published your theories on Wikipedia, you published them elsewhere in a reliable source, and then they go in Wikipedia. You have been asked repeatedly to provide a source for your theory, but you haven't. Yes, what you say about North American pronunciation may be factual, but you have not sourced anywhere that this is what has caused the "error" of "St Patty" to occur. This is what is your original research, or more precisely; original synthesis.
I'm afraid you have misunderstood what I said about the info box. "Patty" should be there. What shouldn't be there, nor in the lead, is a divergence into a detail about how Americans say it differently, and sometimes spell it differently/incorrectly. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 18:30, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

St Patrick's day is not a Public Holiday in NI

According to the source provided [9], St Patrick's day is a Bank Holiday in NI. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 12:06, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Ulster Scots

Can we please remove the Ulster Scots "translation" from the first line. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 09:32, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

I agree 'Saunt Petherick's Day' has no place in first line, and probably no place in entire article. (talk) 14:55, 17 March 2012 (UTC)
And it isn't even good Ulster Scots. -- Evertype· 17:47, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

Right, you're accusing everyone else of saying they don't like it when you seem to be the sole defender of this patty nonsense. Perhaps you should take a holiday from this discussion and allow the other users reach a consensus? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dennycrane101 (talkcontribs) 01:18, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Names for the day in the lead.

Here is the sentence for the lead: It is commonly called simply Patrick's Day, or Paddy's Day, or sometimes Saint Paddy's Day. Here is the text of the footnote: In North America the misspelling Patty for Paddy is sometimes encountered, but the misspelling is due to the fact that intervocalic -tt- and -dd- sound alike in most North American varieties of English, due to a tendency to intervocalic alveolar-flapping. Now, if these are not suitable, perhaps constructive edits could be proposed. -- Evertype· 13:40, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Stop adding OR. Take it to an ANI or at this rate for you 3RR board. Murry1975 (talk) 13:42, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
All you are doing is removing text which has been put forward for discussion. The status quo is not acceptable to many editors. Why don't you try to be constructive? Instead you have simply said "Nope". That is not constructive editing behaviour. Your saying that something is Original Research does not make it Original Research. It is an observable fact that intervocalic /t/ and /d/ are realized as [ɾ] in North American English. We have an article about this phenomenon. Do you deny, somehow, that paddy and patty are both pronounced [ˈpæɾi] in North American English? Do you understand the question? It is not constructive behaviour to simply refuse to allow editors to address a problem in an article. There is a problem in this article. There was even a request to deal with the problem. That is what we are trying to do. The status quo is not acceptable to many editors. Yet you simply revert attempts to deal with the problem. Will you propose text here to address the problem? If you will not, then you should not delete the efforts of other editors who have proposed such text. -- Evertype· 13:49, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
Now who broke the 3RR after warning someone not to? As per WP:VER "Verifiability on Wikipedia is the reader's ability to check cited sources that directly support the information in an article", I can find many articles callinmg it Patty's Day. are you going to deny that? Adding a reference that doesnt reference anything other than your opinion is OR, as you have done. WP:BRD would mean you discuss after you are reverted not revert to your version. You have been around long enough to know these guidelines and rules. It stays in until you prove sources to edit the way you have been.BTW wiki doesnt count. Murry1975 (talk) 14:12, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
WP:BRD is also not a valid excuse for reverting good-faith edits, and "policy" also does not have to be accepted as a valid reason for a revert... I won't deny that there are many American articles mistakenly calling it Patty's, hence why I am pushing for it to be noted along with Patty's in the infobox if it were to remain there. Although this is a similar issue to the amount of places that call Christmas, Xmas. Xmas doesn't appear in the infobox on the Christmas article, so why should Patty appear in this article? TheChrisD RantsEdits 14:27, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
Chris people call it Patty's day, I am asking for proof this is because they are mistaken. BRD is not an excuse full stop, its a guideline. When a change is made to an article and is reverted it should be discussed. If that change isnt referenced there is a high chance it will be reverted as happened. Now I await sources, btw ten people saying leave it out without sources isnt consensus, one person with one source blows them out of the water. The onus is now to prove that its a mistake and one of such magnitude that Patty shouldnt be used in the article. If you read my comment above you would see, if that was the case there would only be one name bieng used, his Latin one. And for the record Chris I dont like Patty, but its verifiable. Murry1975 (talk) 14:38, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────Murray1975, you are still not offering anything constructive. And you have still not answered any of my questions immediately above. You are not helping to improve the article. Yes, some people call it Patty's Day. That spelling is nevertheless a mistake, whether they call it that or not. Above, you have misspelled can't twice as cant and don't at least once as dont. That does not mean that the spelling cant or dont is correct. So we have stipulated that the article should somehow discuss the spelling Patty, and I have provided text to help clarify it. You blanked that text from the article, and despite numerous requests here you have offered nothing constructive. -- Evertype· 14:41, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

The "proof" that they are mistaken is that Patty is a girl's name and the Saint is not a girl, and that Pat and Paddy are shortenings of the boy's name and the latter is used widely to refer to the Saint and the Day and ordinary people in the country of origin of the holiday. The misspelling of Patty for Paddy arose because the two words are perfect rhymes and some Americans do not know how to spell "Paddy". That's it. That's the "proof". Can you think of any other rationale? Irish people say "Paddy's Day", Americans hear it but can't tell Paddy/Patty apart, and they write it down wrongly. That's it. That's not Original Research. It isn't any research at all. It is patently obvious. It isn't the Americans' fault that they don't know that "Patty" is a misspelling, but that is all that it is. A mistake. -- Evertype· 14:48, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
To answer your questions, sorry I hadnt already, in order yes tt and dd can be pronounced the same.Yes I understand the question and that I consider your behavour very uncivil. I will propose text when I have done some more research."Can you think of any other rationale? Irish people say "Paddy's Day", Americans hear it but can't tell Paddy/Patty apart" is pretty much OR, I am sure they can read it, mind you that might be OR aswell. Now answer my questions who is breaking the 3RR? Who should find sources that back there edit? And why are you trying to edit against WP:VER? I havent found any documented proof of this particular example of tt v dd, as a mistake. I honestly will say as above a saints name by docutrine of the church isnt meant to be shortened, out of reverence btw, as we all know Paddy is a shortened version so that too is a mistake, I dont think you fully read my points which are jst as valid as yours. Murry1975 (talk) 15:10, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
I think it would make sense to simply create a separate section listing the various other names aside from St. Patrick's Day/the Feast of St. Patrick. It would remove all this dispute regarding the lede. FWIW, "Saint Paddy" isn't a "mistake", I never heard of any doctrine from any Church that says that saints' names shouldn't be shortened or that it is irreverent to do so. That is definitely OR. Bryccan (talk) 15:20, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
Actually Bryccan, its one of the things I was thaught in religion class in the 80's, along with Noah's ark and the 6 day creation, point being it was "respect" for the Saints and God, much the same way God should always be capitalised and you shouldnt take the Lords name in vein, and yes it falls into OR aswell. But so does Patty's origins with sources. Murry1975 (talk) 15:30, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
Sure, but what you were taught at school in the '80s and church doctrine aren't the same thing. I don't know all that much about the religion but I'm damn near certain that no major church sees shortening saints' names as some kind of breach of doctrine. As for your second point... if you think someone else is using OR, you shouldn't try to use your own OR to counter them. Bryccan (talk) 15:38, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
True Bryccan, I was trying to make the point of OR goes either way. Murry1975 (talk) 15:46, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
Has anyone told Patty Mills he's got a girl's name and he's wrong? And as an Australian, for shame! --Escape Orbit (Talk) 19:05, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

I don't understand how this Patty's Day is a "misspelling" any more than any other Americanized spellings are "misspellings". Jamie (talk) 17:00, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

"Paddy" is a long-standing nickname for "Patrick". "Patty" is normally taken to be a female name. I've never heard it called "Patty's Day", but I wouldn't be surprised if it's said that way sometimes. But generally it's "Paddy's Day". And the "dd" and the "tt" definitely have a different sound in American English. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 22:34, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
But it's more than just sometimes, it's fairly common: I got 845 news results for Patty's Day compared to 911 for Paddy's Day (for both that's the actual count, not estimated). My question is what is the method by which we are supposed to determine when something is a misspelling and when something is an alternative spelling? Jamie (talk) 00:06, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
Even if it's a "misspelling", if it's in common use then it is what it is. I question whether something that's a nickname can be totally a "misspelling" unless someone can find evidence that the only scholarly, acceptable spelling is "Paddy". Otherwise, it should say, "Sometimes called Paddy's Day, or less frequently, Patty's Day." As regards names, I would say "Patsy" is a female name too, yet there was a major leaguer named Patsy Tebeau. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 00:27, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
For an example of how the "tt" can slide into "dd" over time, there's the cartoon I Taw a Putty Tat, which has the original spelling. Tweety's "real" name was "Sweetie", but he lacked the ability to make an "s" sound, as well as some other letters, at least sometimes; so he said his own name as "Tweety", and his pussycat nemesis Sylvester became a "putty tat", which eventually slid into "puddy tat". I wouldn't be surprised if "Patrick" was originally "Patty" and then slid into "Paddy", which is the most typical way I've seen it, but that doesn't prove anything. :) ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 00:33, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
On the other hand, it pays to do some research. According to EO,[11] the Irish for "Patrick" was "Padraig". Assuming the author knows what he's talking about, it was always "Paddy", consistent with the Irish name; and "Patty" is indeed a misspelled nickname, in Irish at least (maybe not in English). (And as you probably know, the term "nickname" itself is a misspelling, as it was originally "an eke name" or some such. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 00:37, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
And by the way, here's CBS News, no less, calling it "Patty".[12] At some point, a "misspelling" can become a standard variant spelling. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 00:42, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
There's no end of possibilities and plausible theories, isn't there? Names and words change all the time, often regionally and sometimes starting from a misunderstanding. But who's to say what happened here? Maybe Patty was commonplace 100 years ago, and the spelling favoured in some places is in fact a remnant of that, rather than a modern day error. Who knows. That's why Wikipedia likes sources and citations to people who do know. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 01:31, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
Sure. And barring a citation, to call it a "misspelling" is original research or personal opinion. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 07:59, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────Baseball bugs, you are confusing orthography and pronunciation. The spelling "Putty" in "I Taw a Putty Tat" is irrelevant because 'all of the consonants (in this case S, SS, and C) there have been orthographically replaced by T; at the time that cartoon was made, the linguistic feature whereby intervocalic /t/ and /d/ fell together as [ɾ] was already well-estabilished in North America. So "putty" there was never pronounced [ˈpʊti]—it was already pronounced [ˈpʊɾi]. -- Evertype· 17:45, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Prove it. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 21:50, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Names for the day in the lead (arbitrary break)

What I observe still is that no one has yet offered anything constructive. The reason some (and not all) Americans write "Patty" is that they don't know any better. This is irksome to Irish editors, who do. The explanation for the misspelling is clearly that in the US the words rhyme, and folk etymology devised the spelling "Patty", since its users were unaware of the correct spelling of the nickname in its Irish context and deriving from its Irish origin. The article needs to say something about this. Perhaps a section on "Name spelling controversy". I warrant that most Americans (those who care about Ireland anyway) when presented with the facts would learn to spell the word correctly. In any case it is the strong view of Irish people that Americans do misspell the name (and no, this is not part of Websterian spelling reforms) and that disquiet is noteworthy. And has indeed given rise to and other manifestations. -- Evertype· 17:45, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
Baseball_Bugs, there is no need to guess whether Etymology Online is correct. And it is not the case that "the Irish for 'Patrick' was 'Padraig'." The Irish for "Patrick" is "Pádraig", just as the Irish for "Michael" is "Mícheál". Everyone knows this. It is common knowledge. -- Evertype· 17:51, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
If "Paddy" is a nickname for "Padraig", there's no reason "Patty" can't be a nickname for "Patrick". ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 22:44, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
Except that it ISN'T. St Patrick, that fellow from Ireland, you know, whose day it is? His name in Irish is Pádraig. And the nickname for him in English is Paddy not Patty as absolutely everyone in Ireland will tell you. -- Evertype· 19:30, 22 March 2012 (UTC)
EscapeOrbit, though you say "There's no end of possibilities and plausible theories, isn't there?" I have yet to see any "plausible" explanation other than the one involving misspelling. If there is "no end of possibilities", please list four of these "plausible theories" you have identified. -- Evertype· 17:54, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
You're still not following what is being said. I don't have to do anything. Maybe no-one knows why "St Patty" is used, and I certainly am not going to suggest explanations that I've invented should go into the article. I don't have to prove your idea wrong either. The onus is entirely on you. You need to provide verification that your suggestion is credible, one that has been published by sources that can be accepted by all, and trusted by readers. You have not done this and every step of your argument demonstrates that the theory that you have put forward is entirely your own. That makes it original research. I'm sorry, and this is not any reflection on the validity, or assessment, of your theory, but Wikipedia does not publish original research. It's a core policy. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 20:35, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
And just to mention; I have been more than constructive on this issue over the years. I have done investigations. But I have unfortunately yet to find any credible published study/research/analysis of the Patty/Paddy issue. Most publications get no further than "they're wrong, we're right", and offer no insight at all to what caused the difference. But I'd be delighted if Evertype could use their expertise in this field to uncover anything. Otherwise, it is a topic that is ripe for some enterprising researcher in the field of cultural history or etymology. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 20:48, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
I did uncover something. And I pointed it out. It's called a spelling error, easily explained by intervocalic alveolar-flapping. This isn't complicated. It required no "research". It required knowledge about English orthography, and about the phonology of General American. I did uncover this. It's patently obvious. The cause is that the words paddy and patty rhyme in General American (as do shutter and shudder) and the word was written down by Americans who did not know that the conventional nickname for St Patrick was spelt Paddy. All nice and uncovered for you. But you choose to disallow it. -- Evertype· 19:30, 22 March 2012 (UTC)
Please read policy on original synthesis, please. "Research" and "Synthesis" are grand titles, but that doesn't mean it has to be complicated. It can be as simple as; this is true (some spell it Patty), and this is true (it sounds the same a Paddy in their accent), so put them together and therefore this must be true too (they're spelling it incorrectly because they think that's what's being said). You cannot do this. If this is how it came about then please cite a reliable source saying so. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 20:01, 22 March 2012 (UTC)
Please do not wikilawyer. And please note the the "synthesis" "rule" (they are all guidellnes, and editors are supposed to use their intelligence) is about "synthesizing published material". Was I doing that? No. I have pointed out items of common knowledge. Please see my comment to BaseballBugs below. -- Evertype· 23:12, 22 March 2012 (UTC)
Following core policy (not guideline) is not wikilawyering. However, maybe I gave what you were doing too much credit. You are right, you are not synthesising published material, you are synthesising what you call "common knowledge" to pull a conclusion out your hat. How this is any improvement on the situation is lost on me. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 02:14, 23 March 2012 (UTC)
It is not valid to label "Patty" as a "misspelling due to such-and-such" unless there's a citation from a recognized authority on the matter. The most you can say until that point is that it's an "alternate spelling". ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 21:49, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
In Tweety's first appearance,[13] he is clearly saying "putty" tat, with all "T" sounds. By the end of the 1940s he was clearly saying "puddy". They are similar but not the same. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 21:57, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
This is hardly very meaningful as the bird is meant to be speaking with a speech impediment no matter what. it does show the instability of intervocalic [t] for Americans, however, since it shifted to [ɾ]. Please note: it did not shift to [d]. Both intervocalic /t/ and /d/ fall together as [ɾ] as I have tried to explain several times. -- Evertype· 19:30, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────What exactly does "a citation from a recognized authority on the matter" mean, Baseball_Bugs? What matter? Is it "a recognized authority" on the spellings Paddy and Patty? Is it "a recognized authority" on "nicknames for St Patrick"? I mean every Irish person knows how to spell Patrick's nickname. One even put up a website about it. So, please, what sort of "recognized authority" are you looking for? An American who agrees that "Patty" is incorrect? An Irishman who points out that "Patty" is incorrect? And, please, at what point will you permit me to write something in the article about this controversy? Evidently I'm not "allowed" to on foot of my knowledge of English and Irish and linguistics and the phonology of English (even though EscapeOrbit praises me for my expertise). Since you and EscapeOrbit there are the arbiters of what may and may not appear in this article (since you have consistently BLANKED my attempts to add content, please, be very specific about exactly what kind of "recognized authority" will satisfy you. -- Evertype· 19:30, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

I think Baseball Bugs's point is that there are no recognised authorities on the matter of Saint Patrick's Day nicknames, because they are not something that can be prescriptively "authorised". The nicknames given to Saint Patrick's day are anything that anyone wishes to call it. If there was a significant number of people who chose to call it Saint Patsydoodle Day, then that's exactly what Wikipedia would report. It wouldn't be Wikipedia's place to call it ridiculous and "incorrect". It may report that many reliable sources are of the opinion it is ridiculous and "incorrect", but that is all. What you have attempted to do is add your own unpublished theory on how the nickname arose, and pronounce judgement on whether people should be using it. That is not writing about this controversy, that is playing a part in it. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 02:14, 23 March 2012 (UTC)
In order to include the name in the infobox, we should have a reference. I've searched for something suitable but come up empty handed. I haven't managed to locate a suitable acadamic-like reference.
I suggest that the article deserves a section to deal with the name. There does seem to be a some suitable references that could put forward the view that the term "Patty" is objectionable to some - for example "The wearing of the green: a history of St. Patrick's Day" which says Happy St Patty's Day greetings whack our eardrums as if the man were canonized hamburger meat" and Knowing that it's St. Paddy's Day, not St. Patty's Day --HighKing (talk) 17:21, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
That's a fair proposal. Unfortunately I'm not getting anything but the default Google books webpage from your links. But nothing wrong with including this dispute over name if it is notable. As long as it doesn't branch into unsourced speculation and proclamation about who's right and who's wrong. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 20:20, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
Also need some references for "St Patty's Day" as being an alternative to "St. Patrick's Day". Several books on the subject of "St. Patrick's Day", but haven't found one that uses "Patty". I realise Google Books isn't ideal - I tried this search but it's odd I can't find/access something of use. Escape_Orbit - perhaps you'll have better luck? --HighKing (talk) 20:38, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
Just pinging - anyone got any references for "St Patty's Day" as a legit alternative to "St Patrick's Day" and "St. Paddy's Day"? I can see usage in newspaper headlines and such, but we need a more authoritative source if we are to include this in the infobox and lede. Anyone help? --HighKing (talk) 15:09, 27 March 2012 (UTC)
Highking why would it be excluded with only the usage we can find? I dont like it personnally but if I am will to reference a national newspaper for a date or coverage of an event why does it change for this instanec? Cheers bud. Murry1975 (talk) 15:13, 27 March 2012 (UTC)
Just want to do things right. First off, we need references for St Patty as an alternative term for St Patrick. Then, as per WP:WEIGHT we need to understand how commonplace it is - perhaps it's a localized name (USA?). I was surprised myself that I can't turn up any reference in Google Books that states that Patty's Day is an alternate name for Patrick's Day. Just looking for help on this. --HighKing (talk) 16:58, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────Cheers Highking, but from news sources stated above and from the over 85 millions hits it really is out there. And I havent found anything to correlate a time frame for a shift in usage from Paddy to Patty, but it is used enough to warrant an inlclusion, baring in mind the St Paddys day only gives 46 million hits. Murry1975 (talk) 18:06, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

It doesn't appear to be localised. I've already demonstrated websites in a number of countries around the world using Patty. Of course, they could be following American influence. However, all this googling around is no substitute for a reliable source, it's just OR and single instances do not prove popular usage. But I've not yet seen any serious examination of the matter. Until we have one it shouldn't be on Wikipedia. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 19:38, 27 March 2012 (UTC)
First things first. Let's first find a reference that says it's a recognized alternative term for Patrick's Day. And not just a localized term, or a fad. Let's find a source that shows it's not some sort of slang. Or an English dialect. Anything. Start from scratch. Let's find a reliable source/reference. --HighKing (talk) 20:48, 27 March 2012 (UTC)
What reliable source would do? It seems that national newspapers are reliable yet when they are against certain views they become irrelevant. I have stated that you cant remove it if its in common usage without good reason and RS to do so. Murry1975 (talk) 19:44, 27 March 2012 (UTC)
Elegantly Wasted
101 Gourmet Cake Bites
Holiday Decorating For Dummies
Slick Tournament Of Rock
Your Personal Soldier: Emails from the Front
Would these be considered RS? The "for Dummies" series is a widely published series. Murry1975 (talk) 19:54, 27 March 2012 (UTC)
OK, one by one.
  • Elegantly Wasted - No, it's a work of fiction
  • 101 Gourmet Cake Bites - No, it's a cookbook. We need something authoritive on the subject (see WP:RS)
  • Holiday Decorating for Dummies - No, it a book on decorating, etc.
  • Slick Tournament Of Rock - No, work of fiction, etc.
  • Your Personal Soldier: Emails from the Front - No, biography, not authoritive.
Interesting in a way that all the books are USA-oriented.
Also, we all *know* the term is used. But it's easy to find a book/reference on "St. Patrick's Day" and show history, show that "Paddy's Day" is also used, etc. Hence it's an easy decision to show this in the info box and in the lede. Now we need to show the same care and weight for similar treatment of Patty. If we can't, then there's a strong argument for treating it differently (whatever that might be). --HighKing (talk) 20:48, 27 March 2012 (UTC)
I am a bit bemused here Highking, the dummies is holiday decorations, the exact subject of this article is a holiday. It mentions St Patrick and St Patty in the same article about that holiday. Murry1975 (talk) 20:56, 27 March 2012 (UTC)
Think of how "bemused" readers would be if this is the source we relied on though.... Take a look at WP:RS and with that in mind, help me understand how we can use this source to support what is said in the article - specifically that "St. Patty's Day" is an alternative name for St. Patrick's Day. I'm thinking that we may need to qualify/explain "St. Patty's Day" in more detail, and probably also "Paddy's Day". I've previously suggested a "Name" section where this can be done. And if we can't find a WP:RS, we should change the infobox and the lede. I'm trying to downplay the excess emotional/national/cultural aspects of the names and simply present facts that can be backed up. Sorry if it's coming across as a wee bit pedantic, but this is why the policies are written the way they are, and this way we can rely on supported facts. Just like it's WP:OR to say "Patty's" is a term mostly found in the USA without a source, it's equally WP:OR to present "Patty's" as an alternative name (and to give it the same weight as Paddy's and Patrick's) without a source. I'm sure there's a source out there ... just need to dig it up! --HighKing (talk) 21:17, 27 March 2012 (UTC)
I think if you are looking for a reliable source that states "St Patty's Day is an alternative name for St Patrick's Day" you're find it hard unless, as I said you can find a serious study of it. Otherwise there are plenty of reliable sources using the terms interchangeably, and not just American ones. Quibbling that they don't actually say that they mean "St Patrick Day" when they say "St Patty's Day" is really pushing it.
--Escape Orbit (Talk) 22:42, 27 March 2012 (UTC)
I find it funny that you mention that there are "not just American [sources]", yet nearly all those links you provided are American: with one Canadian and one Australian. I see now that you are attempting to use alternative sources which don't specifically state that Patty is a recognised alternative term; similar to how myself and Evertype were told no when we tried to use alternative sources to show that Patty was a misspelling and incorrect. Hypocrite? TheChrisD RantsEdits 11:55, 28 March 2012 (UTC)
?? One Canadian and one Australian source means that they are not all American. So I'm mystified to what your point is. As for the rest of what you say; if you cannot see the difference to what I am demonstrating (Here's where 'Patty' is used in reliable sources) and what you were doing (Here's a fact about 'Patty', and here's a fact about American speech, therefore let put the two together to advance my own theory about it) then there's little point to it being explained yet again to you. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 20:49, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────@Highking, for Dummiesis series is classed as RS, the only point being St Patricks day is a secondary subject within the book as such. @Chris what alternative sources to show a mispelling? Murry1975 (talk) 13:33, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

Here's the problem. There *are* authoritative sources on Saint Patrick, and on Saint Patrick's Day. Search in Google Books for absolutely loads. None make mention of Patty's Day. Not one.
But we know some people use the term.
How can we find sources. --HighKing (talk) 14:09, 28 March 2012 (UTC)
LOL is that what I asked already? The crux of it is that Patty is more used thanks to the largest country with "English as an official language" usage. I think we can not ignore this usage, language and spellings are not the sole property of the original users, I cringe when I here Pattys day, I also cringe when Irish stew has beef in it, but the usage is out there and should be given its place within the article with the sources we have. To call it a misspelling or acoustic limp reaction without sources is wrong. To leave it out is wrong. Murry1975 (talk) 14:58, 28 March 2012 (UTC)
I agree. I'm not advocating leaving it out. This is odd and puzzling.
Regarding usage of Patty. It's clear it is in use. So we should start by creating a list of the *most* authoritative sources we can find. Books on the subject. Find a book *about* Saint Patty's Day. Or *about* Saint Patrick's Day that mentions St. Patty's Day. We then need to make sure it's put into the article in a fair NPOV factual way, making sure that minority views are also represented, making sure that we've references to support the factual statements made in the article. So, just it was correct to remove the (mostly USA) from the article since it was WP:OR and unreferenced, we also need to find sources for Patty's Day. Escape says above I think if you are looking for a reliable source that states "St Patty's Day is an alternative name for St Patrick's Day" you're find it hard unless, as I said you can find a serious study of it.. That's a problem. Because there *are* "serious studies" of Saint Patrick and Saint Patrick's Day, and there's a ton of books on the subject. So it begs the question, why are we finding it difficult to find a reference (or any authoritative source) that explains that Saint Patty is an abbreviation or alternative to Saint Patrick (cos I can find exactly this for St. Paddy). We need facts. We need sources. We need references. Otherwise, the article is opinion and fails multiple policies. --HighKing (talk) 15:44, 28 March 2012 (UTC)
OK Highking, we need to find the needle basically, I will give it more time when I can trawl through books online it might take me a couple of days. But my confusion arises over, if thier are more articles out there calling it Pattys why is it still only opinion? Promise my last question, for awhile anyway!!Thanks for the help. Murry1975 (talk) 15:50, 28 March 2012 (UTC)
Nah - I'm actually a bit stunned myself that there doesn't seem to be anything out there. I've searched dictionaries, thesaurus, etc. You'll find this funny. I've searched Google Books. I've search Amazon. Even a lot of the headlines provided by Escape incorrectly "quote" a source as saying Patty, but when you read the article is says Patrick. Like I said (and we all said and we all agree). It *is* in use. It *will* be in the article in some shape or form. But we need facts and references now in order to fit it in correctly. --HighKing (talk) 16:05, 28 March 2012 (UTC)
Yes that made me laugh, taught something similar the first time I read it. Murry1975 (talk) 16:19, 28 March 2012 (UTC)
Perhaps all we can conclude is few think it that big a deal worth writing about. Would be delighted if you found anything. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 20:49, 28 March 2012 (UTC)
Careful with what you say. It not a case of being "delighted" if something is found, or that few think it's a big deal. If sources and references can't be found, I don't see how the article can support including Patty in the infobox or even in the lede. I'll say again. We need facts from reliable sources to support what the article says. To date, we've found nothing that says St. Patty's is an alternative accepted for of St. Patrick's. Murray and myself are searching for references for the past few days - so far nothing. More help might turn something up if you're interested. --HighKing (talk) 14:01, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Fact and citations and references

Been there, tried that, I'm afraid. That's why I wish you luck in your search. We don't need a cite to say the sky is blue. Fact is that Patty is used as an alternative name, quite extensively and verifiably so, and no-one disputes that. So suggesting it may be removed because we can't get a cite that baldly states the obvious is just silly. The issue of whether it is "accepted" or "correct" is a whole other can of worms. There are no authorities on what a cultural event may, or may not, be called. So I don't know who you'd look to to determine it is an "accepted" alternative. All Wikipedia requires is that it is not an uncommon nickname that is being given undue weight. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 14:35, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

I've started a new section - last one is getting long. I agree you don't need a cite to say the sky is blue. Nobody is advocating removing Patty from the article. But we are trying to decide how to correctly include it, based on cites, references, etc.
You say it *is* used as an alternative name. Sure, we can all see that. We can even verify that based on some of the headlines in newspapers, etc.
But is it just a nickname or a localized name used by a minority? Is it recognized or used by authoritative sources? All of these issues effect the WP:WEIGHT given to Patty, and this will be reflected in the article.
My thoughts right now is that Patty is not recognized or used by authoritative sources. This is based on the numerous books and articles dealing with St Patrick and St Patrick's Day that fail to mention it, and that the name and phrase doesn't appear in dictionaries, etc, all of which have Patrick's Day.
Just like the article on Christmas, I propose we remove unofficial name from the infobox (including Paddy and Patty) and create an Entymology section dealing with derivation of the name. --HighKing (talk) 15:34, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
I am opposed to this "Offical name" business. There is no authority anywhere which defines this "officially". Regarding other comments above, it remains my view that the only reason "Patty" is in use is because people don't know the correct spelling. There should be a section on the Naming controversy -- Evertype· 18:52, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
I disagree that there isn't an "official" name. In those countries where it an official public holiday, it is listed as "St. Patrick's Day". For example, Northern Ireland,Republic of Ireland, Montserrat, and Newfoundland and Labrador. --HighKing (talk) 16:06, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
I don't see the line you are drawing between someone, anyone, publishing a book on St Patrick's Day and multiple national news networks publishing a report concerning St Patrick's Day. A national news network is a reliable sources and as authoritative as you are ever going to get. They would not use 'Patty' if it was not going to be understood by their readership and was not used by a significant number of them. That accounts for a very large number of people, so little danger of a single mention being undue weight. The only difference I can see with what you are pursuing is if it is used formally or not. And the answer would be; no of course it isn't, it's an informal nickname. The Pope is not going to drop it into any of his speeches any time soon. But I know of no guidelines that says Wikipedia should only contain formal usage from 'authoritative sources', particularly in an article that covers a subject of popular culture.
Happy to see an Entymology section, as long as it is solidly cited and not speculative OR. But references on it are just as thin on the ground, so it may be difficult. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 21:26, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
Books are regarded as authoritative sources, especially books written by experts about the topic on hand, and have been well researched and published. Books tracing the history of "St. Patrick's Day" written by historians is an ideal reference. For example The wearing of the green: a history of St. Patrick's Day. A national news network is a reliable source for reporting on events as they have happened, etc. Bear in mind though, that generally reporters rely on domain experts if they need to provide background detail and that doesn't make a reporter an expert on particular subject matter. For example, using a headline declaring "Happy St. Patty's Day" as a reference to show that "Patty's Day" is an alternative name for "Patrick's Day" is WP:OR.
I'll write up a simple section on "Names" over the next week, with references, etc. I don't plan on making any other changes for now, although I'm conscious that there's potential for someone to challenge parts. --HighKing (talk) 16:06, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
"St Patty's Day", by all accounts, happened two weeks ago, so a newspaper is a perfect reliable source. A book on history does not necessarily tell you present day usage. Questioning that a paper isn't exactly saying "by 'Saint Patty's Day' we mean 'Saint Patrick's Day', when it mentions both in the same context in the same article reporting the same events on the 17th of March, is a failing to apply common sense. Take things that far and we'd never even be able to demonstrate what is said in one sentence concerns what is said in the next. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 21:54, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
I'm not necessarily disagreeing of fighting with you. But it's odd we can't find one single reference, and that leaves the door open for an objection. Things would be easier if we could. In any case, as I've said, I'm not proposing anything other than writing a new section. --HighKing (talk) 22:46, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
How about this; The dummy's guide to St. Patrick's Day - or St. Patty's Day!. That establishes equivalency.
This is from "" From their website; " is the largest Irish American media site. It was launched in March 2009 in New York. It has close to 800,000 unique visitors a month, with 60,000 e-newsletter subscribers and has continued to grow with each passing month, easily surpassing all other Irish American websites."
Or how about this news website editorial discussing the dispute; What should we call it: 'St. Paddy's Day' or 'St. Patty's'? --Escape Orbit (Talk) 20:27, 31 March 2012 (UTC)
I admire your determination - the headline on IrishCentral is along the lines of what we're looking for. --HighKing (talk) 19:22, 1 April 2012 (UTC)
OK. I've added it as a cite. It's not ideal, but until we have something better it does the job of verifying adequately. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 17:07, 3 April 2012 (UTC)